Appeal No. 1999-2028
Application No. 08/769,036
in support of the rejection, and to appellants' Brief (Paper
No. 49, filed February 26, 1998) and Reply Brief (Paper No.2
52, filed June 15, 1998) for appellants' arguments
thereagainst.
OPINION
As a preliminary matter, we note that appellants indicate
on pages 4-5 that the claims are not to stand or fall
together. Appellants list claims 67, 76, 78 through 82, 88,
90, 92, and 94 together as Group I, claims 68, 73, and 93
together as Group II, and claims 69, 71, 74, 75, 77, 89, 91,
and 95, respectively, as Groups III through X, but does not
argue claim 77 separately. We will treat the claims
substantially according to appellants' groupings , with claim3
77 grouped with claim 67, from which it depends, and with
claims 67, 68, 69, 71, 74, 75, 89, 91, and 95 as
representative of Groups I through IX, respectively.
Regarding the issue raised in the Reply Brief concerning the2
examiner's references to willful false statements and fraud, the examiner is
reminded of the proper language to be used in rejecting claims, as set forth
in MPEP § 707.07(d).
Although appellants include claim 94 as part of Group I, we will not3
treat claim 94 as it has been indicated as containing allowable subject matter
and is, therefore, not before us on appeal.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007