Appeal No. 2000-1743
Application No. 09/314,618
appellant's position (reply brief, pages 5-9) regarding
dependent claims 5, 6 and 8 on appeal.
In view of the foregoing, the examiner's rejection of
claims 1 through 6 and 8 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) will not be
sustained.
To summarize: the examiner's decision rejecting claims 1
through 6 and 8 of the present application under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) is reversed; however, the decision to reject claims 1
through 8 under the judicially created doctrine of
obviousness-type double patenting is affirmed. Since at least
one rejection of each of the claims on appeal has been
affirmed, the decision of the examiner is affirmed.
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007