¶ 15.75 Preface to Rejection in Alleged CIP Based on 35 U.S.C. 102(d)/172
Reference to this design application as a continuation-in-part under 35 U.S.C. 120 is acknowledged. Applicant is advised that the design disclosed in the parent application is not the same design as the design disclosed in this application. Therefore, this application does not satisfy the written description requirement of 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, under 35 U.S.C. 120 35 U.S.C. 120 and is not entitled to benefit of the earlier filing date.
The parent application claimed foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a) - (d). Insofar as the foreign application has matured into a patent/registration more than six months before the filing date of the present application, it qualifies as prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(d) /172.
Examiner Note:
This form paragraph should be followed with a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103(a) depending on the difference(s) between this claim and the design shown in the priority papers.