Ex parte ROBERT A. KEPPEL, et al. - Page 1

                                         THIS OPINION WAS NOT WRITTEN FOR PUBLICATION                                                         
                The opinion in support of the decision being entered today (1) was not written                                                
                for publication in a law journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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 ROBERT A. KEPPEL, SCOTT F.                                                                  
                                             MITCHELL and MICHAEL J. MUMMEY                                                                   
                                                        Appeal No. 94-3287                                                                    
                                                    Application 07/835,1521                                                                   
                                                                ON BRIEF                                                                      

                Before KIMLIN, GARRIS and WARREN, Administrative Patent Judges.                                                               
                GARRIS, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                                                          

                                                        DECISION ON APPEAL                                                                    

                         This is a decision on an appeal from the final rejection of                                                          
                claims 1 through 11, 26  and 27.  The only other claims remaining2                                                                                      
                in the application, which are claims 12 through 25, stand                                                                     

                         1   Application for patent filed February 13, 1992.                                                                  
                         2   Claim 26 contains a minor informality in that the subject referred to                                            
                by the phrase “about 1.7%” is not specifically identified. Consistent with the                                                
                appellants’ specification including appealed claim 1, we interpret the claim 26                                               
                phrase “about 1.7%” as though it read --about 1.7% by volume n-butane--. This                                                 
                informality should be corrected in any further prosecution that may occur.                                                    

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

Last modified: November 3, 2007