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written for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 13
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte WILLIAM R. ALONSO
__________
Appeal No. 2001-1485
Application No. 08/532,211
___________
HEARD: MAY 22, 20031
___________
Before WILLIAM F. SMITH, ADAMS and MOORE, Administrative Patent
Judges.
MOORE, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the final
rejection of claims 1 - 24, which are all of the claims pending in
this application.
1 A request for oral hearing was made within the notice of appeal dated December
18, 1996. Although the appellant appears to have been charged the appeal and
oral hearing fees on January 16, 1997, the request for oral hearing was not
acted upon by the USPTO. As a historical note, we observe that at the time the
request was filed, 37 CFR 1.194 (b) (1993) read “If appellant desires an oral
hearing, appellant must file a written request . . .” 37 CFR 1.194 (b) (1997)
now reads “If appellant desires an oral hearing, appellant must file, in a
separate paper, a written request for such hearing . . .” Such oversights are
now more easily avoided. We sincerely apologize for the delay in discovering
the oral hearing request.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007