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written for publication in a law journal and (2) is not binding
precedent of the Board.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. 17
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte Douglas R. Anton,
Carl G. Krespan,
and Allen C. Sievert
____________
Appeal No. 95-1256
Application No.08/043,9171
____________
ON BRIEF
____________
Before WINTERS, WILLIAM F. SMITH, and LORIN, Administrative Patent Judges.
LORIN, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the final rejection of claims 1-16,
which are all of the claims pending in this application.2 On consideration of the record,
we reverse and remand to the examiner with instructions to consider the issue developed
1 Application for patent filed April 7, 1993. According to applicants, this application is a
continuation-in-part of Application 07/964,973, filed October 22, 1992, now abandoned.
2 In a previous decision (paper no. 15), the application was
remanded to the examiner for consideration of a Petition and
Information Disclosure Statement. They have now been
considered.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007