Appeal No. 95-3387
Application No. 08/005,942
The references relied upon by the examiner are:
Schmatz 5,166,135 Nov. 24, 1992
Sandoz (Belgium)
'310 Pat. 851,310 Aug. 10, 1977
Sandoz (Belgium)
'067 Pat. 859,067 Mar. 28, 1978
Michel (German)
'130 Pat. 2,065,130 June 24, 1981
Claims 1-15 stand provisionally rejected under the
judicially created doctrine of obviousness-type double
patenting
as lacking patentable distinction over (1) Claims 1-17 or
(2) Claims 1-4 or (3) Claims 3-20 or (4) Claims 4-7 or (5)
Claims 1-11 and 13 or (6) Claims 1-10 or (7) Claims 1-9 of
copending applications (1) 07/936,558; (2) 07/963,332; (3)
07/775,774; (4) 07/960,983; (5) 07/936,531; (6) 07/936,434;
and (7) 07/959,948; respectively. We affirm this rejection.
Claims 1-15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over
Schmatz alone or in the alternative over '310 Pat. or '067
Pat. in combination with Michel. We reverse this rejection.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007