Appeal No. 2000-0002
Application 08/848,477
having Applicant file a terminal disclaimer to
assure that the two patents will remain in common
ownership.
We disagree with each of appellant's arguments.
Appellant's arguments are without merit because: (1) the
judicially created doctrine of obviousness-type double
patenting was not eliminated by either Congress or any Federal
court due to the recent revisions of the patent term
provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 154; and, to the extent policy
considerations have any bearing on our decision making
authority under 35 U.S.C. § 134, (2) the policy rationale for
the judicially created doctrine of obviousness-type double
patenting remains notwithstanding the current patent term
provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 154.
The amendment in 1995 to 35 U.S.C. § 154 changed, in
general, the term of an issued patent from 17 years from the
date of issue to 20 years from the date of filing. The change
took effect on June 8, 1995 and applied to utility and plant
patent applications filed on or after that date. In 1999, §154
was amended again to include limitations on extending the term
of certain patents and included a provision that:
No patent the term of which has been disclaimed
beyond a specified date may be adjusted under this
10
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007