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(2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 21
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_____________
Ex parte LOUIS R. GABELLO,
LEON R. ZOELLER and JAMES P. GUY
_____________
Appeal No. 96-2440
Application 08/099, 2891
______________
ON BRIEF
_______________
Before HAIRSTON, KRASS and LEE, Administrative Patent Judges.
LEE, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the
final rejection of claims 1-4, 6-8, 10, 12-14, 16-18, 20, 22-25,
27-29, 31-34, 36-38 and 40-41. Claims 5, 9, 11, 15, 19, 21, 26,
30, 35, 39 and 42 have been canceled. No claim has been allowed.
1Application for patent filed September 24, 1993.
According to the appellants, it is a continuation-in-part of
application 08/067,434, filed May 24, 1993. However, the
examiner has indicated on the file wrapper of the application
that the alleged continuation data is incorrect.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007