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 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007