Ex Parte Junghans - 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          was not written for publication and is not binding precedent                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 RUDI JUNGHANS                                 
                                     __________                                       
                                Appeal No. 2003-1147                                  
                               Application 09/598,580                                 
                                     __________                                       
                                      ON BRIEF                                        
                                     __________                                       

          Before PAK, JEFFREY T. SMITH, and POTEATE, Administrative Patent            
          Judges.                                                                     
          POTEATE, Administrative Patent Judge.                                       

                                 DECISION ON APPEAL                                   
               This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the final                 
          rejection of claims 1-3 and 11-14.  Claims 4-10 are also pending            
          in the application but have been withdrawn from consideration as            
          directed to a non-elected invention.  See Appeal Brief, Paper               
          No. 13, received October 11, 2002, page 2; Examiner’s Answer,               
          Paper No. 14, mailed December 24, 2002, page 2, paragraph (3).              

                                          1                                           





Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007