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was not written for publication and is not binding precedent of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 NORBERT HAMPP,
ANDREAS POPP, DIETER OESTERHELT
and CHRISTOPH BRAUCHLE
______________
Appeal No. 1997-1713
Application 08/381,839
_______________
HEARD: January 11, 2001
_______________
Before WARREN, LIEBERMAN and JEFFREY T. SMITH, Administrative Patent Judges.
WARREN, Administrative Patent Judge.
Decision on Appeal and Opinion
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the decision of the examiner refusing to allow
claims 3, 5 through 8, 11, 12 and 16 through 18 as amended subsequent to the final rejection.1
We have very carefully considered the record before us, and based thereon, find that we cannot
sustain any of the four grounds of rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over the applied references.2,3 It is
1 See the amendments of August 21, 1995 (Paper No. 6) and March 25, 1996 (Paper No. 10).
2 The grounds of rejection and applied references are set forth at pages 2 through 9 of the answer.
3 The examiner withdrew the ground of rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, in the
advisory action of April 9, 1996 (Paper No. 11).
- 1 -
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007