Ex Parte Kane 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                   for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 31         
                       UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                      
                                     ____________                                     
                          BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                          
                                   AND INTERFERENCES                                  
                                     ____________                                     
                        Ex parte JOHN P. KANE and KARL D. SACHS                       
                                     ____________                                     
                                 Appeal No. 2004-1500                                 
                              Application No. 09/736,673                              
                                     ____________                                     
                                       ON BRIEF                                       
                                     ____________                                     
          Before GARRIS, PAK, and JEFFREY T. SMITH, Administrative Patent             
          Judges.                                                                     
          GARRIS, Administrative Patent Judge.                                        

                                  DECISION ON APPEAL                                  
               This is a decision on an appeal from the final rejection of            
          claims 1-30 which were at that time all of the claims pending in            
          this application.  On page 2 of the answer, the Examiner withdrew           
          his prior art rejection of claims 4, 8 and 13-30, although his              
          double patenting rejections of claims 1-30 were maintained.                 
          Subsequent to the answer, the Appellants filed a terminal                   
          disclaimer and claim amendment in an attempt to obviate the                 






Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007