Ex parte STEWART - Page 1




                 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                        (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 18              

                      UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                       
                                    _____________                                     
                         BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                           
                                 AND INTERFERENCES                                    
                                    _____________                                     
                              Ex parte JOHN V. STEWART                                
                                    _____________                                     
                                Appeal No. 2000-1471                                  
                               Application 08/935,655                                 
                                   ______________                                     
                                      ON BRIEF                                        
                                   _______________                                    

          Before ABRAMS, McQUADE and LAZARUS, Administrative Patent                   
          Judges.                                                                     
          McQUADE, Administrative Patent Judge.                                       

                                 DECISION ON APPEAL                                   


               John V. Stewart originally took this appeal from the                   
          final rejection of claims 4 through 7.   Inasmuch as the1                                     
          appellant has canceled claims 4 and 7, the appeal now involves              
          claims 5 and 6, the only claims currently pending in the                    


               In the final rejection (Paper No. 5), the examiner referred to claims1                                                                     
          4 through 7 as claims 1 through 4, respectively, due to a claim numbering   
          error by the appellant which has since been corrected.                      





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

Last modified: November 3, 2007