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was not written for publication in a law journal and (2) is not
binding precedent of the Board.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. 32
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte STEPHEN A. DIBIASE, LARRY W. ARNDT,
GREGORY M. STANSFIELD and LOUIS A. RENBAUM
__________
Appeal No. 94-3371
Application 07/986,8781
__________
ON BRIEF
__________
Before JOHN D. SMITH, WEIFFENBACH and ELLIS, Administrative
Patent Judges.
WEIFFENBACH, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the
examiner's final rejection of claims 2-7, 9-17 and 73, which are
1Application for patent filed December 4, 1992. According to
appellants, this application is a continuation of Application 07/659,411 filed
March 11, 1991, now abandoned, which is a continuation of Application
PCT/US90/00815 filed February 21, 1990, which is a continuation-in-part of
Application 07/470,431 filed January 24, 1990, now abandoned, which is a
continuation of Application 07/319,011 filed March 3, 1989, now abandoned.
1
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007