Appeal No. 1997-3650
Application No. 08/206,658
1) Consult with his supervisory patent examiner to determine
the propriety of the nonobviousness-type double patenting
rejection in question, and
2) If proper, obtain approval of the Technology Center
Director prior to forwarding this application to the Board of
Patent Appeals and Interferences.
CONCLUSION
In summary:
1) The examiner’s obviousness-type double patenting
rejection of claims 31 through 44, 46 and 47 is affirmed;
2) The examiner’s Section 103 rejection of claims 31 through
44, 46 and 47 is reversed; and
3) The application is remanded to the examiner to follow the
proper procedure set forth in the Manual of Patent Examining
Procedure regarding the examiner’s nonobviousness-type double
patenting rejection of claims 31 through 44, 46 and 47.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007