Appeal No. 2005-1529
Application No. 10/385,314
37 CFR § 41.52 states in relevant parts:
(a)(1) Appellant may file a single request for
rehearing within two months of the date of the original
decision of the Board . . . . The request for
rehearing must state with particularity the points
believed to have been misapprehended or overlooked by
the Board. Arguments not raised in the briefs before
the Board and evidence not previously relied upon in
the brief and reply brief(s) are not permitted in the
request for rehearing except as permitted by paragraphs
(a)(2) and (a)(3) of this section . . . .
(2) Upon a showing of good cause, appellant may
present a new argument based upon a recent relevant
decision of either the Board or a Federal Court.
(3) New arguments responding to a new ground of
rejection made pursuant to § 41.50(b) are permitted.
The appellants have not challenged the examiner’s position
that “claims 1-17 stand or fall together . . . ” set forth at
page 2 of the Answer. See the Brief and Reply Brief in their
entirety. Nor have the appellants presented any substantive
arguments for the separate patentability of the claims on appeal
as discussed at page 3, footnote 1, of our Decision. The
appellants, for the first time, argue the limitations of claims
6 and 12. The new arguments directed to claims 6 and 7 are not
“based upon a recent relevant decision of either the Board or a
Federal Court.” See the Request for Rehearing in its entirety.
Nor are these new arguments in response to any new ground of
rejection made pursuant to 37 CFR § 41.50(b). Compare the
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007