Ex parte FORD - Page 1




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               written for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.     

                                                               Paper No. 23           

                      UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                       
                                    ____________                                      
                         BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                           
                                 AND INTERFERENCES                                    
                                    ____________                                      

                            Ex parte CHRISTOPHER W. FORD                              
                                    ____________                                      
                                Appeal No. 1999-0510                                  
                             Application No. 08/728,787                               
                                    ____________                                      
                                HEARD: Nov. 13, 2000                                  
                                    ____________                                      

          Before CALVERT, COHEN, and GONZALES, Administrative Patent                  
          Judges.                                                                     
          CALVERT, Administrative Patent Judge.                                       


                                 DECISION ON APPEAL                                   
               This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims 1,                
          2, 4 and 6 to 20, all the claims remaining in the application.              
               The claims on appeal are drawn to a sterilizing separator              
          device (claims 1, 2, 4 and 6), a system for sterilizing                     
          (claims 7 to 16), and a method of sterilizing (claims 17 to                 
          20).  They are reproduced in Appendix A of appellant’s brief.               






Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007