Appeal No. 1996-2350
Application 07/843,833
created doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting as being
unpatentable over all of the claims of Tsai '201.
OPINION
We have given careful consideration to the
appellant's specification and claims, to the applied prior art
references, and to the respective positions articulated by the
appellant and the examiner. In so doing, we find ourselves in
agreement with appellant that the applied prior art fails to
establish prima facie obviousness of the claimed subject
matter. Accordingly, we will not sustain the examiner's § 103
rejection. However, we
shall summarily sustain the examiner's obviousness-type double
patenting rejection. We add the following primarily for
emphasis.
We begin with the examiner's § 103 rejection.
The examiner acknowledges that Tsai '124 includes a
chlorine containing bleaching agent (chlorine dioxide) in the
Page 5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007