Appeal 2007-0025 Page 3
Application 09/792,151
We AFFIRM.
The Brief1 separately argues the following groups of claims:
• Claims 2, 7-9, 15, and 162 (Br. 14-18);
• Claims 5 and 13 (Br. 18-19);
• Claims 3 and 11 (Br. 19-20);
• Claims 4 and 123 (Br. 22-23); and,
• Claims 6 and 14 (Br. 20-22).
Claims 2-5, 7-9, 11-13, 15, 16 under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as being unpatentable over
Dedrick in view of Angles in view of Freeman.
Claims 2, 7-9, 15, and 16
Because Appellants argue claims 2, 7-9, 15, and 16 as a group, pursuant to
the rules, the Board selects representative claim 2 to decide the appeal with respect
to this rejection, and claims 7-9, 15, and 16 will stand or fall with claim 2. 37
C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(1)(vii) (2006). It reads as follows:
1 Our decision will make reference to Appellants’ Appeal Brief (“Br.,” filed 18
May 2006), the Examiner's Answer (“Answer,” mailed 3 July 2006), and
Appellants’ Reply Brief (“Reply Br.,” filed 6 September 2006).
2 Although the Brief (pp. 14-18) includes claims 5 and 13 in the section discussing
these claims, claims 5 and 13 are also argued separately later in the Brief (pp. 18-
19). In light of their separate argument, we will decide the appeal as to claims 5
and 13 separate from these claims taking into consideration the arguments made as
to these claims.
3 The Brief (pp. 22-23) puts claim “11” in this group but since claim 11 was
addressed earlier in the Brief (pp. 19-20), we assume Appellants meant to refer to
claim 12, not claim 11.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013