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publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 29
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte DENNIS LEE, MARK W. KNECHT,
KALAINE M. WONG,
and OIKWAN TSANG
____________
Appeal No. 1997-2297
Application No. 08/337,636
____________
ON BRIEF1
____________
Before BARRETT, FLEMING, and LEVY, Administrative Patent Judges.
LEVY, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from
the examiner’s final rejection of claims 1-21 . 2
1 The Oral Hearing was waived by appellants in a communication
received July 31, 2001 (Paper No. 28).
2 An amendment (Paper No. 15, filed July 30, 1996) filed subsequent to
the final rejection (Paper No. 8, mailed February 26, 1996) was denied entry
by the examiner (Paper No. 16, mailed August 12, 1996). In the brief (page 2)
appellants proposed an amendment of the claims to clarify the issues on
appeal. These proposed changes appear in the appendix to the brief. In the
answer, (page 3) the examiner states, inter alia, that the proposed amendment
is acceptable, and that "[t]he examiner will base this Examiner's Answer on
the appendixed claims." An amendment (Paper No. 22, filed February 24, 1997)
incorporating these changes to the claims was subsequently filed, and was
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007