Appeal No. 2004-0746 Page 9
Application No. 09/163,588
41 to 55 under the judicially created doctrine of double patenting over claims 1-36 of
copending Application No. 09/163,958 is affirmed; the decision of the examiner to reject
claims 1 to 11, 13, 14, 16 to 23, 27 to 32, 35 to 39 and 41 to 55 under the judicially
created doctrine of double patenting over claims 1-21 and 23-49 of copending
Application No. 08/852,119 is affirmed; the decision of the examiner to reject claims 1 to
11, 13, 14, 16 to 23, 27 to 32, 35 to 39 and 41 to 55 under the judicially created doctrine
of double patenting over claims 1-16 of U. S. Patent No. 5,623,260 is affirmed; the
decision of the examiner to reject claims 1 to 11, 13, 14, 16 to 23, 27 to 32, 35 to 39 and
41 to 55 under the judicially created doctrine of double patenting over claims 1-15 of U.
S. Patent No. 5,657,010 is affirmed; the decision of the examiner to reject claims 1 to
11, 13, 14, 16 to 23, 27 to 32, 35 to 39 and 41 to 55 under the judicially created doctrine
of double patenting over claims 1-80 of U. S. Patent No. 5,668,543 is affirmed; and the
decision of the examiner to reject claims 1 to 11, 13, 14, 16 to 23, 27 to 32, 35 to 39 and
41 to 55 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Ross in view of Bolger is
reversed.
Since at least one rejection of each of the appealed claims has been affirmed,
the decision of the examiner is affirmed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007