Appeal No. 2001-0529 Page 10
Application No. 08/846,600
Cable Elec. Prods., Inc. v. Genmark, Inc., 770 F.2d 1015, 1025, 226 USPQ 881, 886-87
(Fed. Cir. 1985) (quoting Keller, 642 F.2d at 425, 208 USPQ at 881).
Here, as explained regarding the anticipation rejection of claim 19, we have
found that Young's graphics engine generates a set of texel addresses for a particular
point of one of a plurality of spans. Therefore, we affirm the obviousness rejection of
claim 1 and of claims 3-9 and 22, which fall therewith.
CONCLUSION
In summary, the rejection of claim 19 under § 102(e) and the rejection of
claims 1, 3-9, and 22 under § 103(a) are affirmed. "Any arguments or authorities not
included in the brief will be refused consideration by the Board of Patent Appeals and
Interferences. . . ." 37 C.F.R. § 1.192(a)(2002). Accordingly, our affirmance is based
only on the arguments made in the brief. Any arguments or authorities not included
therein are neither before us nor at issue but are considered waived. No time for taking
any action connected with this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007