Appeal No. 1999-1442
Application No. 08/610,681
precedent of our
reviewing court that the limitations from the disclosure are
not to be imported into the claims. In re Lundberg, 244 F.2d
543, 113 USPQ 530 (CCPA 1957); In re Queener, 796 F.2d 461,
230 USPQ 438 (Fed. Cir. 1986). We also note that the
arguments not made separately for any individual claim or
claims are considered waived. See 37 CFR § 1.192(a) and (c).
In re Baxter Travenol Labs., 952 F.2d 388, 391, 21 USPQ2d
1281, 1285 (Fed. Cir. 1991)
("It is not the function of this court to examine the claims
in greater detail than argued by an appellant, looking for
nonobviousness distinctions over the prior art."); In re
Wiechert, 370 F.2d 927, 936, 152 USPQ 247, 254 (CCPA
1967)("This court has uniformly followed the sound rule that
an issue raised below which is not argued in that court, even
if it has been properly brought here by reason of appeal is
regarded as abandoned and will not be considered. It is our
function as a court to decide disputed issues, not to create
them.”).
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007