Appeal No. 2004-0963
Application No. 09/384,088
only briefly indicate the applicability of Marshall to the subject matter of
representative claim 40 on appeal. There appears to us to be no
attempted correlation of the applied prior art and the two recited clauses
related to filling operations of each of claims 40-43 on appeal.
In summary, since we have sustained the various provisional
obviousness-type double patenting rejections set forth in the final rejection
of independent claims 1, 9, 17 and 25 on appeal, but have reversed the
rejection of claims 1-32, 37 and 40-43 under 35 U.S.C. § 103, the decision
of the examiner is affirmed-in-part.
-10-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007