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journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 31
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
________________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
________________
Ex parte TED M. McVAY, GENE F. BAXTER
and FREDERICK C. DUPRE JR.
________________
Appeal No. 95-2022
Application No. 08/063,0561
________________
ON BRIEF
________________
Before WINTERS, GARRIS and PAK, Administrative Patent Judges.
WINTERS, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This appeal was taken from the examiner's decision rejecting
claims 2, 3, 7 through 10, 12, 13, 15 and 27 through 37. Claims
17, 18, 22 through 24, 38 and 39, which are the only other claims
remaining in the application, stand allowed.
1Application for patent filed May 19, 1993. According to
appellants, this application is a continuation of Application No.
07/713,256, filed June 13, 1991, now abandoned.
-1-
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007