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a law journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 25
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_____________
Ex parte DEEPAK R. MANIAR
____________
Appeal No. 95-3759
Application 08/145,1181
____________
ON BRIEF
____________
Before KIMLIN, WEIFFENBACH and WARREN, Administrative Patent Judges.
WEIFFENBACH, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the examiner's final rejection of
claims 1-10 and 12-22 which are all of the claims remaining in the application. We reverse.2
1Application for patent filed November 3, 1993.
2We note that in the final rejection the examiner rejected claims 1-22 as being unpatentable over Laing. The inclusion of
claim 11 in the rejection appears to be an inadvertent error on the part of the examiner because the examiner acknowledged
(continued...)
-1-
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007