Ex Parte Stratum - 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                                  for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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 BRUCE G. VAN STRATUM                                           
                                                 ____________                                                  
                                             Appeal No. 2005-1329                                              
                                           Application No. 10/187,038                                          
                                                 ____________                                                  
                                                   ON BRIEF                                                    
                                                 ____________                                                  
             Before FRANKFORT, MCQUADE, and NASE, Administrative Patent Judges.                                
             FRANKFORT, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                           



                                             DECISION ON APPEAL                                                
                   This is a decision on appeal from the examiner's final rejection of claims 1                
             through 12, all of the claims pending in the application.  Subsequent to the final                
             rejection, the examiner has withdrawn the rejections of claims 5 through 12, thus                 
             leaving only the rejections of claims 1 through 4 for review on appeal.                           


                   Appellant’s invention relates to a gas propellant delivery cartridge with a burst           
             cap that allows controlled discharge of a propellant gas generated within the cartridge.          






Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007