Appeal No. 96-2591
Application 07/957,106
Summary
(a) the rejection of claims 1-17 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is not sustained;
(b) the rejection of claims 1-15 under the judicially created doctrine of obviousness-type
double patenting is not sustained;
(c) a new rejection of appealed claims 1-17 is entered pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 196(b).
This decision contains a new ground of rejection pursuant to 37 C.F.R
§ 1.196(b)(amended effective Dec. 1, 1997, by final rule notice, 62 Fed. Reg. 53,131, 53,197 (Oct.
10, 1997), 1203 Off. Gaz. Pat. & Trademark Office 63, 122 (Oct. 21, 1997)). 37 C.F.R.
§ 1.196(b) provides that, “A new ground of rejection shall not be considered final for purposes of
judicial review.”
37 C.F.R. § 1.196(b) also provides that the appellant, WITHIN TWO MONTHS FROM
THE DATE OF THE DECISION, must exercise one of the following two options with respect to the
new ground of rejection to avoid termination of proceedings (§ 1.197(c)) as to the rejected claims:
(1) Submit an appropriate amendment of the claims so rejected or a showing of
facts relating to the claims so rejected, or both, and have the matter reconsidered by the
examiner, in which event the application will be remanded to the examiner. . . .
(2) Request that the application be reheard under § 1.197(b) by the Board of
Patent Appeals and Interferences upon the same record. . . .
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007