Appeal No. 1999-1335
Application No. 08/463,437
The subject matter on appeal relates to a multidimensional
polyester oligomer of a particular general formula. Further
details of this appealed subject matter are recited in
illustrative claim 47 reproduced below:
47. A multidimensional polyester oligomer of the
general formula:
Ar-(Q)w
wherein Ar = an aromatic hydrocarbon radical of
valence w;
w = an integer greater than or equal to 3;
and
Q = a hydrocarbon radical that includes at
least one ester linkage and a terminal
crosslinking end-cap radical.
The examiner relies on the following reference as evidence
of unpatentability under the judicially created doctrine of
obviousness-type double patenting:
Lubowitz et al. 5,175,233 Dec. 29, 1992
('233 patent)
Claims 47 through 57, 64 through 66, and 68 through 71 on
appeal stand rejected under the judicially created doctrine of
obviousness-type double patenting as unpatentable over claims 1
through 14 of the '233 patent. (Examiner’s answer, page 5.)
We affirm the aforementioned rejection.3
(Advisory actions of April 29, 1998 and August 18, 1998, papers 14 and
22, respectively.)
3 The appellants state: "Each claim stands separately;
arguments for the patentability of each claim appear in the Argument
section." (Appeal brief, p. 6.) To the contrary, we do not find any
specific arguments for the separate patentability of each claim either
in the appeal brief or reply brief. We therefore limit our discussion
to representative claim 47. See 37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7) (1997).
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007