To avoid an obviousness-type double patenting rejection, what option can be utilized?

Filing a terminal disclaimer is a valid option to avoid an obviousness-type double patenting rejection because it allows an applicant to surrender the term of the later patent to prevent extending the monopoly beyond the inventive period of the first patent. A terminal disclaimer disclaims the portion of the term of the later patent that would cause an overlap with the earlier patent's term and enforces that the two patents are commonly owned. This effectively addresses the concern that two patents could unjustly extend the patent rights on a single invention.

By filing a terminal disclaimer, the applicant indicates that they are ready to comply with the stipulations set forth by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) regarding the non-patentability of the later filed patent over the earlier one, thereby assuring that the public is not deprived of the invention's use for an extended period due to overlapping patents.

Other choices present options that do not resolve the issue of double patenting. For instance, filing for a new patent on the same invention would likely result in the USPTO's rejection due to the existing patent, which covers the same material. Obtaining a continuation patent does not inherently prevent obviousness-type double patenting because this type of patent typically continues to build on the existing claims