Ex Parte SCALIA et al - 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                                        today was not written for publication and is not binding                                                          
                                        precedent of the Board.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. 14                                  
                                        UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                                                                         
                                                                 _______________                                                                          
                                              BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                                                                          
                                                             AND INTERFERENCES                                                                            
                                                                 _______________                                                                          
                                                          Ex parte LORENZO SCALIA                                                                         
                                                        and BARRY DONALD SEWING                                                                           
                                                                  ______________                                                                          
                                                               Appeal No. 2000-1176                                                                       
                                                               Application 08/928,902                                                                     
                                                                 _______________                                                                          
                                                                      ON BRIEF                                                                            
                                                                 _______________                                                                          
                  Before WARREN, OWENS and WALTZ, Administrative Patent Judges.                                                                           
                  WARREN, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                                                                    
                                                         Decision on Appeal and Opinion                                                                   
                           We have carefully considered the record in this appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134, including                                        
                  the opposing views of the examiner, in the answer, and appellants, in the brief and reply brief,                                        
                  and based on our review, find that we cannot sustain the rejection of appealed claims 9, 10, 15                                         
                  and 16, under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b), as being clearly anticipated by Suzuki et al. (Suzuki); of                                            
                  appealed claims 9 through 16 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Suzuki; and                                            
                  of appealed claims 17 through 25 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over                                                    
                  Elderbaum in view of Carlson.1,2                                                                                                        

                                                                                                                                                         
                  1  These are all of the claims in the application.  See the amendment of December 8, 1998 (Paper                                        
                  No. 4).                                                                                                                                 

                                                                      - 1 -                                                                               



Page:  1  2  3  4  5  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007