Appeal No. 2001-2353
Application No. 09/411,370
co-pending application No. 09/411,369, filed October 4, 1999.1
Claim 1 stands provisionally rejected under the judicially
created doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting as being
unpatentable over claims 1-3 of appellants' co-pending
application No. 09/411,369.2
Claims 2 and 3 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point
out and distinctly claim the subject matter which appellants
regard as the invention.
Claims 1 and 2 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Kageyama.
Claims 1, 3 and 4 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Torii.
1 Appeal No. 2001-2361 in appellants’ co-pending application
No. 09/411,369 is being decided concurrently herewith.
2 As indicated on page 4 of the examiner's answer, the
provisional double patenting rejection of claims 2 through 4 "has
been vacated in light of applicant's [sic] remarks in the Brief
on Appeal, pp. 11-13."
33
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007