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and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 28
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte ROBERT W. NEIL
__________
Appeal No. 1998-2639
Application 08/425,735
ON BRIEF
___________
Before STONER, Chief Administrative Patent Judge, HARKCOM, Vice Chief
Administrative Patent Judge, and WILLIAM F. SMITH, Administrative Patent Judge.
Per Curiam
Robert W. Neil (Neil or appellant) appeals from the final rejection of claims 20
through 23, all of the claims now pending in this application, under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
anticipated. We reverse.
Neil’s claims on appeal are directed to a billiards cue. Claims 20 through 23 are
reproduced in the appendix of Neil’s original brief filed September 9, 1996. The details of
those claims are not important to the decision of the appeal before us because, as we
shall see, the dates of activity relied upon by the examiner fail to establish a bar to
patentability of a pool cue of any description to Neil under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b).
1
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007