Appeal No. 2004-2044
Application No. 09/476,708
Claims 59, 60, 66, and 68 as Group I;
Claims 61-64 and 67, as Groups II-VI;
Claims 69 and 71-73 as Group VII;
Claim 70 as Group VIII;
Claims 74-76 as Group IX; and
Claims 77-78 as Groups X-XI.
See pages 5-6 of the brief. Appellants have not explained why
each group is believed to be separately patentable. Therefore,
Appellants have failed to fully meet the requirements of
37 CFR § 1.192 (c)(7) (July 1, 2002) as amended at 62 Fed. Reg.
53169 (October 10, 1997), which was controlling at the time of
Appellants' filing of the brief. 37 CFR § 1.192 (c)(7) states:
Grouping of claims. For each ground of
rejection which appellant contests and which
applies to a group of two or more claims, the
Board shall select a single claim from the
group and shall decide the appeal as to the
ground of rejection on the basis of that
claim alone unless a statement is included
that the claims of the group do not stand or
fall together and, in the argument under
paragraph (c)(8) of this section, appellant
explains why the claims of the group are
believed to be separately patentable. Merely
pointing out differences in what the claims
cover is not an argument as to why the claims
are separately patentable. (Emphasis added)
We will, thereby, consider Appellants' claims as standing or
falling together in eight groups corresponding to the eight
rejections at issue noted above, and we will treat:
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007