Ex parte KECK - Page 1






                    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          (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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 ARTHUR C. KECK                                
                                   _____________                                      
                                Appeal No. 1998-2442                                  
                             Application No. 08/155,987                               
                                   ______________                                     
                                HEARD: JULY 11, 2000                                  
                                   _______________                                    

          Before CALVERT, FRANKFORT, and BAHR, Administrative Patent                  
          Judges.                                                                     
          CALVERT, Administrative Patent Judge.                                       

                                 DECISION ON APPEAL                                   
               This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims 41                
          and 44.  Claims 32 to 40, 42, 43 and 45 to 48, the other                    
          claims remaining in the application, have been allowed.                     
               The appealed claims are drawn to a method of making a                  

                                          1                                           





Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007