Appeal No. 1998-0456 Page 6
Application No. 08/454,706
Accordingly, we institute the following rejection under
37 CFR 1.196(b) of claims 9, 12, and 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
second paragraph:
Claims 9, 12, and 13 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
112, second paragraph, for the reasons advanced by the
examiner in the final rejection (page 2), and the new ground
of rejection found in the examiner's answer (page 4). We note
that appellant has not argued the propriety of the rejection,
and that the examiner and appellant are in agreement that
appellant's proposed changes will overcome the rejection.
Nevertheless, the rejection should be maintained until such
time as the actual amendments have been made to the claims.
The final rejection additionally included a rejection of
claim 9 under the doctrine of obviousness-type double
patenting.
Appellant additionally proposed (brief, page 18) withdrawing
claim 9 of copending application 08/041,543 "should the claim
in this application be allowed" in order to overcome the
obviousness-type double patenting rejection. The examiner
stated
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007