Ex parte GREGOIRE et al. - Page 1



                       The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written                                                       
                       for publication in a law journal and is not binding precedent of the Board.                                                      

                                                                                                                    Paper No. 43                        

                                         UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                                                                      
                                                                   ____________                                                                         
                                               BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                                                                       
                                                              AND INTERFERENCES                                                                         
                                                                   ____________                                                                         
                                  Ex parte JEAN-PIERRE GREGOIRE and MICHEL BONNION                                                                      
                                                                   ____________                                                                         
                                                           Appeal No. 1998-2927                                                                         
                                                      Application No. 07/584,667                                                                        
                                                                   ____________                                                                         
                                                                      ON BRIEF                                                                          
                                                                   ____________                                                                         
                 Before FRANKFORT, McQUADE, and NASE, Administrative Patent                                                                             
                 Judges.                                                                                                                                
                 NASE, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                                                                     



                                                             DECISION ON APPEAL                                                                         
                          This is a decision on appeal from the examiner's final                                                                        
                 rejection of claims 1 to 4.  Claims 5 to 22 have been allowed.                                                                         
                 No claim has been canceled.1                                                                                                           


                          1We find the appellants' indication on page 1 of the                                                                          
                 brief (Paper No. 38, filed August 11, 1997) that, to the best                                                                          
                 of their knowledge and belief, there are no related appeals                                                                            
                 which would have a bearing on this appeal to be clearly in                                                                             
                 error since the rejection before us in this appeal was first                                                                           
                 made as a new ground of rejection under 37 CFR § 1.196(b) by                                                                           
                 another panel of the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences                                                                         
                 in their February 23, 1996 DECISION ON APPEAL (Paper No. 29).                                                                          




Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007