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not binding precedent of the Board.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. 29
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_____________
Ex parte JURGEN PLOG, THOMAS E.F. WILLE,
and RALPH VON VIGNAU
_____________
Appeal No. 95-0665
Application 08/082,3261
______________
ON BRIEF
_______________
Before HAIRSTON, KRASS and LEE, Administrative Patent Judges.
LEE, Administrative Patent Judge.
ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
On April 15, 1998, we rendered a decision sustaining the
rejection of claims 6-8 and reversing the rejection of claim
9. The appellants have filed a request for reconsideration
Application for patent filed June 24, 1993. According to appellants,1
this application is a continuation of Application No. 07/554,603, filed July
18, 1990, now abandoned, which is a continuation of Application No.
07/369,567, filed June 21, 1989, now abandoned.
1
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007