Appeal No. 2003-0125
Application No. 09/722,529
Claims 26 through 50 stand rejected under the judicially
created doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting as being
unpatentable over claims 1 through 30 of U.S. Patent No.
6,189,689.2
The full text of the examiner’s rejections and response to
the argument presented by appellant appears in the answer (Paper
No. 15), while the complete statement of appellant’s argument can
be found in the main and reply briefs (Paper Nos. 14 and 18).
OPINION
In reaching our conclusion on the issues raised in this
appeal, this panel of the board has carefully considered
2 Claim 1 was also finally rejected on obviousness-type
double patenting grounds, but this rejection was withdrawn by the
examiner in the answer (page 6).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007