THIS OPINION WAS NOT WRITTEN FOR PUBLICATION
The opinion in support of the decision being entered today (1) was not written for
publication in a law journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.
Paper No. 13
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte STEVEN H. LEITCH,
LISA J. BARTZ,
and KATHLEEN B. FISH
__________
Appeal No. 96-0937
Application 08/203,7231
__________
ON BRIEF
__________
Before STONER, Chief Administrative Patent Judge, and WINTERS and WILLIAM F.
SMITH, Administrative Patent Judges.
WILLIAM F. SMITH, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the final rejection of claims 1, 2, 4
through 6, 8 through 12, 14 through 16, and 18 through 26, all the claims pending in
the application. The examiner withdrew the rejection of claims 9, 10, and 19 in the
1Application for patent filed February 28, 1994. According to appellants, the
application is a continuation of Application 08/026,144, filed March 2, 1993, now
abandoned; which is a continuation of Application 07/671,578, filed March 19, 1991,
now abandoned.
1
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007