Appeal No. 2006-2736 Page 9
Application No. 10/038,167
directions of a mouse. Therefore, we affirm the rejection of claim 1 and of claims 2-4
and 9, which fall therewith.
Rather than arguing the rejection of claims 5-8 separately, the appellants rely on
their aforementioned argument. (Appeal Br. at 12-13) Unpersuaded by this argument,
we also affirm the rejections of these claims.
III. CONCLUSION
In summary, the rejections of claims 1-9 under § 103(a) are affirmed.
"Any arguments or authorities not included in the brief or a reply brief filed
pursuant to [37 C.F.R.] § 41.41 will be refused consideration by the Board, unless good
cause is shown." 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(1)(vii). Accordingly, our affirmance is based only
on the arguments made in the briefs. Any arguments or authorities omitted therefrom
are neither before us nor at issue but are considered waived. Cf. In re Watts, 354 F.3d
1362, 1367, 69 USPQ2d 1453, 1457 (Fed. Cir. 2004) ("[I]t is important that the applicant
challenging a decision not be permitted to raise arguments on appeal that were not
presented to the Board.") No time for taking any action connected with this appeal may
be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(1)(iv).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007