Appeal No. 97-1057
Application 08/160,298
grouping is technically not applicable. The only argument
offered by appellants for the patentability of these claims is
that they incorporate the limitations of claim 42 by
dependence. Since we have previously determined that the
rejection of claim 42 would be sustained, and since appellants
have offered no compelling reason for the patentability of
claims 83-97, we also sustain the Section 103 rejection of
these claims.
In summary, the provisional rejection of claims 1-27,
29-68 and 70-97 on the ground of obviousness-type double
patenting is sustained. The rejection of claims 1-3, 9-13,
16-27, 34, 36-44, 50-54, 57-68, 75 and 77-97 under 35 U.S.C. §
103 is sustained with respect to claims 1-3, 9-13, 39, 42-44,
50-54, 80 and 83-97 but is reversed with respect to claims 16-
27, 34, 36-38, 40, 41, 57-68, 75, 77-79, 81 and 82.
Accordingly, the decision of the examiner rejecting claims 1-
27, 29-68 and 70-97 is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in
connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR
§ 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED
17
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007