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not binding precedent of the Board.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. 15
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte OLE K. NILSSEN
__________
Appeal No. 1997-2289
Application 08/395,691
___________
ON BRIEF
___________
Before JERRY SMITH, FLEMING, and LALL, Administrative Patent
Judges.
LALL, 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 to 19, which constitute all1
1 An amendment after the final rejection was filed [paper
no. 6]. It made no changes to the claims, however, it
contained two affidavits questioning the validity of one of
the applied references. The Examiner, in advisory action
[paper no. 7], commented on the two affidavits as “[i]t is
improper for the Examiner to comment on the validity of a
patent” citing 35 U.S.C. § 282. This issue is, however, not
relevant to this decision.
1
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007