Ex Parte Hanson - 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                                   today was not written for publication and is not binding                                           
                                   precedent of the Board.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. 16                            
                                   UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                                                          
                                                         _______________                                                              
                                        BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                                                            
                                                     AND INTERFERENCES                                                                
                                                         _______________                                                              
                                                 Ex parte DEREK W. HANSON                                                             
                                                         ______________                                                               
                                                      Appeal No. 2003-1516                                                            
                                                      Application 09/569,700                                                          
                                                         _______________                                                              
                                                             ON BRIEF                                                                 
                                                         _______________                                                              
               Before WARREN, LIEBERMAN and KRATZ, 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 appellant, in the brief and reply brief, and                    
               based on our review, find that we cannot sustain the grounds of rejections advanced on appeal:                         
               claims 1 through 5, 8, 11 through 14 and 19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being                           
               unpatentable over Tsai et al. (Tsai);  and claims 6, 7, 9, 10 and 20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.                    
               § 103(a) as being obvious over Tsai.1,2  We refer to the examiner’s answer and to appellant’s                          
               brief and reply brief for a complete exposition of the opposing views of the parties.                                  
                                                                                                                                     
               1  Claims 1 through 14, 19 and 20 are all of the claims in the application. See the appendix to the                    
               brief.                                                                                                                 
               2  Answer, pages 3-5. The examiner withdrew the grounds of rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112,                            
               first and second paragraphs, of record in the final rejection (answer, page 5).                                        

                                                             - 1 -                                                                    



Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007