Appeal No. 2006-2284 Page 9
Application No. 09/912,211
reverse the obviousness rejection of claims 23 and 42 and of claims 24, 26-32, and 44-
50, which depend therefrom.
B. CLAIMS 33-37, 51, AND 52
"When multiple claims subject to the same ground of rejection are argued as a
group by appellant, the Board may select a single claim from the group of claims that
are argued together to decide the appeal with respect to the group of claims as to the
ground of rejection on the basis of the selected claim alone. Notwithstanding any other
provision of this paragraph, the failure of appellant to separately argue claims which
appellant has grouped together shall constitute a waiver of any argument that the Board
must consider the patentability of any grouped claim separately." 37 C.F.R.
§ 41.37(c)(1)(vii) (2005).
Here, the appellants argue claims 33-37, which are subject to the same ground
of rejection, as a group. (Appeal Br. at 10-11.) We select claim 33 as the sole claim on
which to decide the appeal of the group. "With this representation in mind, rather than
reiterate the positions of the examiner or the appellants in toto, we focus on the
following three points of contention therebetween," Massingill, at *2:
• objects responding to the same frequency
• shielding the interior of a container
• determining the number of members within the container.
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013