Ex Parte STAPHANOS - 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                   for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 17         
                       UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                      
                                     ____________                                     
                          BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                          
                                   AND INTERFERENCES                                  
                                     ____________                                     
                              Ex parte STEPHEN STAPHANOS                              
                                     ____________                                     
                                 Appeal No. 2004-1887                                 
                              Application No. 09/430,469                              
                                     ____________                                     
                                       ON BRIEF                                       
                                     ____________                                     
          Before GARRIS, WALTZ, and MOORE, Administrative Patent Judges.              
          GARRIS, Administrative Patent Judge.                                        

                                  Decision on appeal                                  
               This is a decision on an appeal from the final rejection of            
          claims 1-19 and 21-25.  On pages 3 and 4 of the answer (i.e., Paper         
          No. 15, mailed March 4, 2004 in response to a remand by this panel          
          of the Board), the Examiner states that the prior art final                 
          rejection of claims 12-14 is withdrawn whereby these claims are now         
          objected to but otherwise allowable.  We therefore dismiss the              
          appeal as to claims 12-14 thereby leaving claims 1-11, 15-19 and            
          21-25 before us on this appeal.  These are all of the claims                
          remaining in the application.                                               





Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007