Ex parte LOMMASSON - 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          not written for publication and is not binding precedent of                 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. 12              

                      UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                       
                                     __________                                       
                         BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                           
                                  AND INTERFERENCES                                   
                                     __________                                       
                            Ex parte TIMOTHY C. LOMMASSON                             
                                     __________                                       
                                Appeal No. 2000-0310                                  
                               Application 08/848,759                                 
                                     ___________                                      
                                      ON BRIEF                                        
                                     ___________                                      
          Before WARREN, OWENS and JEFFREY SMITH, Administrative Patent               
          Judges.                                                                     
          OWENS, Administrative Patent Judge.                                         

                                 DECISION ON APPEAL                                   
               This is an appeal from the examiner’s final rejection of               
          claims 1-13.  Claims 14-19, which are all of the other claims               
          in the application, stand withdrawn from consideration by the               
          examiner as being directed toward a nonelected invention.                   
                                    THE INVENTION                                     
               The appellant’s claimed invention is directed toward a                 


                                          1                                           





Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007