Application of James L. Jezl, Habet M. Khelghatian and Louise D. Hague

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• “The view we take renders it unnecessary to consider at length the double patenting rejection advanced by the [PTO]. That rejection — one of ‘double patenting of the obvious type’ — presents the same basic question as the § 103 rejection, but in narrower aspect.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).