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and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 49
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte AIMEE G. POURRAT
and
HENRY POURRAT
____________
Appeal No. 1997-2385
Application No. 08/271,5711
____________
ON BRIEF
____________
Before WINTERS, SPIEGEL, and MILLS, Administrative Patent Judges.
SPIEGEL, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the examiner's final
2
rejection of claims 30 through 34, which are all of the claims pending in this application.
1 Application for patent filed July 7, 1994. According to appellants, this application is continuation
of application 08/032,456, filed March 17, 1993, now abandoned, which is a continuation of application
07/736,040, filed July 25, 1991, now abandoned.
2 In the Office action mailed November 3, 1993 (Paper No. 16), the examiner indicated that the
amendment and substitute specification filed March 17, 1993 by appellants (Paper No. 14) had been
entered. The examiner also indicated that claims 13 through 15 and 17 through 22 had been cancelled in
the Office action mailed November 16, 1994 (Paper No. 29) in accordance with the amendment filed July 7,
1994 (Paper No. 27). These clerical oversights should be corrected upon return of this application to the
jurisdiction of the examiner.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007