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publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 26
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte SIDNEY T. SMITH, DAVID V. BACEHOWSKI,
WILLIAM KOLANKO, LARRY A. ROSENBAUM,
STEPHEN L. SMITH, JAMES G. BENDER,
LECON WOO and MICHAEL T.K. LING
____________
Appeal No. 1998-1382
Application No. 08/330,717
____________
ON BRIEF
____________
Before JOHN D. SMITH, LIEBERMAN, and DELMENDO, Administrative
Patent Judges.
DELMENDO, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134
from the examiner’s final rejection of claims 1 through 4, 6
through 8, 11 through 22, 25 through 27, 30 through 42, and
45. Claims 9, 10, 28, 29, 43, and 44, which are the only1
1In response to the final Office action, the appellants
filed a response on November 25, 1996, in which amendments to
claims 1, 21, and 34 were proposed. (Paper 13.) The examiner
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007