Appeal No. 2004-1939
Application 10/120,497
claims 1 through 14, 18 through 32, and 36 through 44 would have been obvious as a matter of
law under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
We summarily affirm the grounds of rejection collectively encompassing all of appealed
claims 1 through 14, 18 through 32, and 36 through 44 under the judicially created doctrine of
obviousness-type double patenting because appellants have stated the intention to file “such
Terminal Disclaimers will be filed once allowable subject ,matter is deemed to exist in the
subject application” (brief, page 9).
The examiner’s decision is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal may be
extended under 37 CFR § 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED
- 8 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007