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journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 16
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
________________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
________________
Ex parte ROBERT D. MAHONEY, JIRO KAWAMOTO, RICHARD A. LUNDGARD,
MARK F. SONNENSCHEIN, HAWK S. WAN and H. NELSON BECK
________________
Appeal No. 95-4970
Application No. 08/012,8721
________________
ON BRIEF
________________
Before KIMLIN, GARRIS and PAK, Administrative Patent Judges.
KIMLIN, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims 1-21
and 23-39, all the claims remaining in the present application.
Claim 1 is illustrative:
1Application for patent filed February 3, 1993. According
to appellants, this application is a continuation-in-part of
Application No. 07/746,756, filed August 19, 1991, now U.S.
Patent No. 5,246,647, issued September 21, 1993; which is a
continuation-in-part of Application No. 07/329,666, filed
March 28, 1989, now U.S. Patent No. 5,043,112, issued
August 27, 1991.
-1-
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007