Appeal No. 2005-1180
Application No. 09/791,298
(1) Claims 2-4, 7 and 8 stand or fall with the patentability of claim 1.
(2) Claims 51-55 stand or fall with the patentability of claim 50.
(3) Claim 56 stands or falls alone.2
(4) Claim 9 stands or falls with the patentability of claim 5.
(5) Claim 10 stands or falls with the patentability of claim 6.
(6) Claims 12-15 stand or fall with the patentability of claim 11.
(7) Claim 16 stands or falls alone.
(8) Claims 18 and 19 stand or fall with the patentability of claim 17.
(9) Claims 21-23, 26-28, 38-42 and 45-47 stand or fall with the patentability of
claim 20.
(10) Claims 29, 43 and 48 stand or fall with the patentability of claim 24.
(11) Claims 30, 44 and 49 stand or fall with the patentability of claim 25.
(12) Claims 32-35 stand or fall with the patentability of claim 31.
(13) Claim 36 stands or falls alone.3
2 Appellants group claims 50-56 together. However, claims 50-55 are subject to a
different ground of rejection than claim 56. As explained in In re McDaniel, 293 F.3d 1379,
1384, 63 USPQ2d 1462, 1466 (Fed. Cir. 2002), an applicant has the right to have each contested
ground of rejection reviewed and measured against the scope of at least one claim within the
group of claims subject to that ground of rejection. Therefore, the patentability of claim 56 will
be considered separately from the patentability of claims 50-55.
3 Appellants group claims 31-36 together. However, claims 31-35 are subject to a
different ground of rejection than claim 36. Therefore, the patentability of claim 36 will be
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007