Appeal No. 2006-3044 Page 4
Application No. 10/285,939
appellants’ arguments set forth in the briefs along with the examiner’s
rationale in support of the rejections and arguments in rebuttal set forth in
the examiner’s answer. Only those arguments actually made by appellants
have been considered in this decision. Arguments which appellants could
have made but chose not to make in the briefs have not been considered
and are deemed to be waived. See 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(1)(vii)(2004).
See also In re Watts, 354 F.3d 1362, 1368, 69 USPQ2d 1453, 1458 (Fed.
Cir. 2004).
It is our view, after consideration of the record before us, that the
evidence relied upon supports the examiner’s rejection of the claims on
appeal. Accordingly, we affirm.
GROUPING OF CLAIMS
We consider the obviousness of the following logical groups of claims,
as defined under separate subheadings and argued separately by appellants
in the briefs.
GROUP A: Claims 1, 2, 5-7 and 9-18 [brief, page 5].
GROUP B: Claim 19 [brief, page 7].
GROUP C: Claim 20 [brief, page 10].
GROUP D: Claims 21, 22, 25-27 and 29-38 [brief, page 12].
GROUP E: Claim 3, 4 and 8 [brief, page 15].
GROUP F: Claim 23, 24 and 38 [brief, page 15].
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007