Appeal No. 2006-1769
Application No. 09/784,292
II. Obviousness-type Double Patenting Rejection
The examiner has provisionally rejected claims 1-2, 6, 10, 11,
17, 19, 21, 30, 34, and 35 under the judicially-created doctrine of
obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims
1-16, 20-26, 28-45, and 48-51 of co-pending Application No.
10/032,383. The appellants did not present arguments rebutting the
outstanding obviousness-type double patenting rejection in their
briefs. As such, we affirm this rejection.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, for the reasons set forth above, we affirm the
rejection of claims 1-40.
-18-
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007