Ex parte BURNS et al. - 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                                      publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 33                        
                                         UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                                                                      
                                                                   ____________                                                                         
                                               BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                                                                       
                                                              AND INTERFERENCES                                                                         
                                                                   ____________                                                                         
                              Ex parte KEVIN BURNS, ELLEN M. THOMAS and NAN-YAO SU1                                                                     
                                                                   ____________                                                                         
                                                           Appeal No. 2000-0604                                                                         
                                                      Application No. 08/483,735                                                                        
                                                                   ____________                                                                         
                                                          HEARD:  MARCH 22, 2001                                                                        
                                                                   ____________                                                                         
                 Before CALVERT, FRANKFORT and BAHR, Administrative Patent                                                                              
                 Judges.                                                                                                                                
                 BAHR, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                                                                     









                          1We note that appellants filed a petition under 37 CFR § 1.48(b)                                                              
                 requesting deletion of Kevin Burns and Ellen M. Thomas as inventors on the                                                             
                 basis that they were originally and properly included as inventors but their                                                           
                 invention is no longer being claimed in this application (Paper No. 20, filed                                                          
                 May 14, 1998).  There is no indication in the application file that the                                                                
                 primary examiner has considered or rendered a decision on the petition.                                                                
                 Accordingly, Kevin Burns and Ellen M. Thomas are still listed as inventors in                                                          
                 this application.  As the ultimate decision on the petition does not appear to                                                         
                 have any bearing on the issue before us in this appeal, we have decided this                                                           
                 appeal in the interest of judicial efficiency and leave the petition to be                                                             
                 decided by the examiner upon return of jurisdiction of this application to the                                                         
                 examiner.                                                                                                                              
                                                                           1                                                                            






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

Last modified: November 3, 2007