Ex parte Sanders: argument in reply brief is too late

from Ex parte Sanders



Appellant contends that Figure 1 of Roth fails to disclose a database
engine that “applies the IDD to the document to generate a set of index keys
for the document.” Reply Br. 5. Appellant presents this argument for the
first time in the Reply Brief. Appellant’s new argument is untimely and has
not been considered. See Ex parte Borden, 93 USPQ2d 1473, 1474 (BPAI
2010) (informative).
We sustain the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 102. Appellant
has not presented arguments for separate patentability of claims 2, 3, 5-12,
and 14-22, which fall with claim 1.