Ex Parte Hower 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                  written for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.                   
                                                                                                      
                                                                                                      

                          UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                                    
                                           _____________                                               
                              BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                                       
                                         AND INTERFERENCES                                             
                                           _____________                                               
                       Ex parte PHILIP L. HOWER and TAYLOR R. EFLAND                                   
                                           _____________                                               
                                      Appeal No. 2005-0814                                             
                                   Application No. 10/036,323                                          
                                           ______________                                              
                                             ON BRIEF                                                  
                                          _______________                                              
            Before CAROFF, PAK, and RUGGIERO, Administrative Patent Judges.                            
            CAROFF, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                       


                                        DECISION ON APPEAL                                             
                  This is a decision on appeal from the examiner’s final                               
            rejection of claims 14, 16 and 18.  Claims 27-32 stand withdrawn                           
            from further consideration by the examiner as being drawn to a                             
            non-elected invention.  Claim 17, the only other claim now                                 
            pending in appellants’ application, stands subject to an                                   
            objection but, according to the examiner, would be allowable if                            
            written in independent form.                                                               





Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007