Appeal No. 2005-0509 Page 4
Application No. 09/449,237
With full consideration being given to the subject matter on appeal, the
Examiner’s rejections and the arguments of the Appellant and the Examiner, for
the reasons stated infra, we affirm the Examiner’s rejection of claims 81, 82, 85,
and 93 under 35 U.S.C. § 103, and we reverse the Examiner’s rejection of claims
83-84, 86-92, and 95-97 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Only those arguments actually made by Appellant have been considered
in this decision. Arguments that Appellant could have made but chose not to
make in the brief have not been considered. We deem such arguments to be
waived by Appellant [see 37 CFR § 41.37(c)(1)(vii) effective September 13, 2004
replacing 37 CFR § 1.192(a)].
Appellant has indicated that for purposes of this appeal, the claims stand
or fall together in twelve groupings. See page 5 of the brief. However, Appellant
does not argue each group of claims separately and explain why the claims of
each group are believed to be separately patentable. Rather, Appellant has
repeated the same few arguments for multiple groups. See pages 6-18 of the
brief and pages 2-4 of the reply brief. Appellant has not met 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 Appellant’s 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
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007