Appeal No. 1998-2727
Application 08/220,949
and the Examiner, reference is made to the revised brief and
answer for the respective details thereof.
OPINION
After a careful review of the evidence before us, we
will not sustain the rejection of claims 11, 12 and 18 through
21
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 or the judicially created doctrine of
double patenting.
At the outset, we note that Appellants present
arguments regarding the formal content of the specification
(brief-page 3). The Examiner is correct in that this issue
relates to petitionable subject matter and is not before the
Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences.
DOUBLE PATENTING
The Examiner contends that claims 11 and 18 through
20 are not patentable over the Mottier patent and the Mottier
application, each taken separately, under the judicially
created doctrine of double patenting. We agree with
Appellants (brief-pages 5 and 6) that the claims before us are
5-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007