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law journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 35
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_____________
Ex parte HARRIHAR A. PERSHADSINGH
and THEODORE W. KURTZ
_____________
Appeal No. 95-0885
Application 07/725,3271
______________
HEARD: OCTOBER 14, 1997
_______________
Before JOHN D. SMITH, GARRIS and WEIFFENBACH, 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 1-7 and 9-18. We affirm-in-part.
Application for patent filed July 8, 1991. According to applicants, this Application is a continuation-in-part1
of Application 07/421,102, filed October 13, 1989, now U.S. Patent No. 5,053,420, granted October 1, 1991.
-1-
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007