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written for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 29
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_____________
Ex parte MATTHEW B. HOYT, BOBBY J. BAILEY,
STANLEY A. MCINTOSH,
PHILLIP E. WILSON and GARY W. SHORE
_____________
Appeal No. 2003-0580
Application No. 09/139,081
______________
HEARD: October 8, 2003
_______________
Before PAK, OWENS, and LIEBERMAN, Administrative Patent Judges
OWENS, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This appeal is from a nonfinal rejection of claims 41-52,
which are all of the claims pending in the application.1
THE INVENTION
The appellants claim a carpet comprising acid-dyed
sheath/core nylon fibers which are resistant to ozone fading.
1 In an appeal in which claims have been at least twice rejected,
the board has jurisdiction as discussed in Ex parte Lemoine, 46 USPQ2d
1432 (Bd. Pat. App. & Int. 1995).
1
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007