Appeal No. 2001-1210 Page 8
Application No. 09/255,990
invention was made to have modified Wood's method of cleaning and printing a web to
a method of cleaning and printing sheets.
For the reasons set forth above, the decision of the examiner to reject claim 1
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is affirmed.
Claims 2 to 4 and 9 to 12
Claims 2 to 4 and 9 to 12 which depend from claim 1 have not been separately
argued by the appellant. In fact the appellant has stated that claims 2 to 4 and 9 to 12
stand or fall with claim 1 (brief, p. 15). Accordingly, we have determined that these
claims must be treated as falling with their independent claim. See In re Nielson, 816
F.2d 1567, 1572, 2 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1987) and 37 CFR §§ 1.192(c)(7)
and 1.192(c)(8)(iv). Thus, it follows that the examiner's rejection of claims 2 to 4 and 9
to 12 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is also sustained.
Claim 5
We sustain the rejection of claim 5 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Claim 5 reads as follows:
A method for two-sided printing of a sheet of printing material having a
front side and a rear side, in a sheet-fed rotary printing press, which comprises:
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007