Ex parte HAYTER - Page 1




          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          not written for publication and is not binding precedent of                 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. 18              

                      UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                       
                                     __________                                       
                         BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                           
                                  AND INTERFERENCES                                   
                                     __________                                       
                                Ex parte JAMES HAYTER                                 
                                     __________                                       
                                Appeal No. 1999-2263                                  
                               Application 08/581,721                                 
                                     ___________                                      
                                      ON BRIEF                                        
                                     ___________                                      
          Before HAIRSTON, JERRY SMITH and LEVY, Administrative Patent                
          Judges.                                                                     
          JERRY SMITH, Administrative Patent Judge.                                   

                                 DECISION ON APPEAL                                   
          This is a decision on the appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134                      
          from the examiner’s final rejection of claims 1-10, which                   
          constituted all the claims in the application.  An amendment                
          filed concurrently with the appeal brief cancelled claims 2-4               
          and 7-10 and was entered by the examiner.  Accordingly, this                
          appeal is now directed to the rejection of claims 1, 5 and 6.               


                                          1                                           





Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007