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(2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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 SCOTT R. SUMMERFELT
______________
Appeal No. 96-0176
Application 08/012,5561
_______________
ON BRIEF
_______________
Before WARREN, OWENS and KRATZ, Administrative Patent Judges.
WARREN, Administrative Patent Judge.
Decision on Appeal
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. ' 134 from the decision of the examiner finally rejecting
claims 1 through 15, 28 and 30 and refusing to allow claims 29 and 31 as amended subsequent to the
final rejection. Claims 1 through 12, 14 and 28 through 31 remain for consideration on appeal because
the examiner withdrew the sole ground of rejection of claims 13 and 15 in the supplemental examiner=s
answer (Paper No. 11; page 5). Claims 16 through 27 are also of record and stand withdrawn from
consideration under 37 CFR ' 1.142(b). Claim 1 is illustrative of the claims on appeal:
1Application for patent filed February 2, 1993.
- 1 -
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007