Appeal No. 2000-0467
Application 08/511,645
Hence, we find that Appellant’s claim language does not
preclude the reading of the Berry’s teaching on Appellant’s claim
1 and therefore we find that the teachings of Berry meet
Appellant’s claimed limitation of the steps of determining
whether the second object is a service or container object, then
either performing a service or performing a move as argued and
set forth supra.
For claims 1 through 6 and 10 through 17, Appellant has not
made any other arguments. 37 CFR § 1.192 (a) states:
Appellant must, within two months from the date of the
notice of appeal under § 1.191 or within the time
allowed for reply to the action from which the appeal
was taken, if such time is later, file a brief in
triplicate. The brief must be accompanied by the fee
set forth in § 1.17 (c) and must set forth the
authorities and arguments on which appellant will rely
to maintain the appeal. Any arguments or authorities
not included in the brief will be refused consideration
by the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences,
unless good cause is shown.
Thus, 37 CFR § 1.192 provides that only the arguments made by
Appellant in the brief will be considered and that failure to
make an argument constitutes a waiver on that particular point.
Support for this rule has been demonstrated by our reviewing
court in In re Berger, 279 F.3d 975 (Fed. Cir. 2002), wherein the
15
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007