Appeal No. 1997-3073
Application No. 07/953,680
Turning lastly to the res judicata rejection, we find
that the mere fact that the instant application is a C-I-P of
the parent application means that the disclosures are not the
same. The claims in this C-I-P application differ from the
claims in the parent application, and the parent application
did not have the eleven 37 CFR § 1.132 declarations. In 2
summary, the res judicata rejection is reversed because the
issues in the parent application differ from the issues in the
application before us on appeal (Brief, pages 35 through 42).
2In view of the reversal of all of the prior art
rejections, we will not offer any comments concerning the
merits of the declarations.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007