<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
All,<br>
<br>
I have an atypical obviousness-type double patenting rejection
that I can't seem to wrap my head around as being proper. The
Office Action notes a specific aspect that is recited in the later
claims and absent from the applicant's prior patent that is the
basis for the rejection. But then the Examiner cites a generic
third-party reference and states that it would have been obvious to
combine them so that the later claims are not patentably distinct.
The problem is, that the cited third-party reference does not
suggest use in the current claimed context and, even if it did, it
does not meet the limitation of the current claims.<br>
<br>
By analogous example, the later claim specifically recites a
"single layer, non-laminated, homogeneous sheet" and the third-party
reference only discloses various multi-layer, homogeneous laminated
sheets. The office action states that it is known in the art to
make sheets that are homogeneous and non-homogeneous and so it would
have been obvious to produce the claimed invention using the sheets
as disclosed by the third-party reference (ignoring the single
layer/multi-layer and non-laminated/laminated express differences).
<br>
<br>
My questions are: <br>
(1) Is the rejection referencing the third party reference
proper at all (other than for something trivial), particularly when
the context is different and all the missing element aspects are not
met?<br>
(2) Is it proper to argue against the obviousness-type
double patenting as if this was a simple obviousness rejection,
i.e., not every element is disclosed and so even if the two were
combined, it would not result in the claimed invention due to the
absence of any teaching or suggestion of specifically having either
or both of a single layer and/or a non-laminated sheet?<br>
<br>
Thanks in advance.<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
<style type="text/css">
span.c16 {color: #800000}
span.c15 {font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 8pt}
span.c14 {color: #800000; font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 8pt; text-decoration: underline}
span.c13 {color: #0000FF; font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 8pt; text-decoration: underline}
span.c12 {color: #800000; font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 8pt}
span.c11 {font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 8pt}
span.c10 {color: #656565; font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 10pt}
span.c9 {color: #800000; font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 10pt}
span.c8 {font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial}
span.c7 {color: #989898; font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 8pt}
span.c6 {color: #656565; font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 8pt}
span.c5 {font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 10pt}
span.c4 {color: #656565; font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 11pt}
span.c3 {color: #000080; font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial}
span.c2 {font-size: 8pt}
span.c1 {color: #0000FF; font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 12pt}
</style><span class="c1"><strong>Richard Straussman</strong></span><span
class="c3"><span class="c2"><strong><br>
</strong></span> </span><strong><span class="c4">Senior
Counsel</span><span class="c5"><strong><br>
</strong></span> <span class="c6">Registered Patent Attorney</span><span
class="c5"><br>
</span></strong> <span class="c6">Member NY, NJ & CT Bars</span><span
class="c5"><br>
</span> <span class="c7"><strong>. . . . . . . . . . . . . .</strong></span>
<span class="c8"></span> <span class="c5"><br>
</span> <span class="c9"><strong>Weitzman Law Offices, LLC</strong></span><span
class="c16"><span class="c5"><br>
</span> <span class="c9"><strong>Intellectual Property Law</strong></span><span
class="c9"><br>
</span> <span class="c4">425 Eagle Rock Avenue, Suite 401</span><span
class="c5"><br>
</span> <span class="c4">Roseland, NJ 07068</span><span
class="c11"><br>
</span> <span class="c12"><strong>direct line</strong></span> <span
class="c6">973.403.9943<br>
</span> <span class="c12"><strong>main</strong></span> <span
class="c6">973.403.9940<br>
</span> <span class="c12"><strong>fax</strong></span><span
class="c12"></span> <span class="c6">973.403.9944</span><span
class="c11"><br>
</span> <span class="c12"><strong>e-mail</strong></span><span
class="c6"></span> <span class="c13"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:rstraussman@weitzmanip.com">rstraussman@weitzmanip.com</a></span><span
class="c11"><br>
<br>
</span> <span class="c14"><strong><a
href="http://www.weitzmanip.com/"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://www.weitzmanip.com</a><br>
</strong></span> <span class="c15"><br>
</span><br>
<br>
<br>
</span>
</div>
</body>
</html>