What type of double patenting rejection can be resolved by filing a terminal disclaimer?

The correct option regarding the type of double patenting rejection that can be resolved by filing a terminal disclaimer is the obviousness-type double patenting rejection.

When a patent application faces an obviousness-type double patenting rejection, it indicates that the claims in the new application are not sufficiently distinct from those in a previously granted patent owned by the same inventor. This type of rejection arises when the differences between the two patents would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art at the time the earlier patent was filed.

To overcome this rejection, inventors can file a terminal disclaimer, which essentially lets the USPTO know that the term of the new patent will not exceed that of the earlier patent. By doing this, the applicant disclaims any portion of the term of the new patent that would extend beyond the term of the already issued patent, thus addressing the concern of unjustly extending the patent term for what is essentially the same invention.

In contrast, statutory double patenting rejections involve two different, yet related inventions that are both claimed in patents owned by the same inventors and cannot be resolved through a terminal disclaimer. Utility and design patent rejections typically do not relate to the double patenting issue addressed by terminal disclaimers.