THIS OPINION WAS NOT WRITTEN FOR PUBLICATION
This opinion (1) was not written for publication and
(2) is not binding precedent of the Board.
Paper No. 23
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte MICHAEL D. BECK
and LAURENCE R. SIMAR
____________
Appeal No. 95-1763
Application 08/109,201
____________
ON BRIEF
____________
Before HARKCOM, Vice Chief Administrative Patent Judge, and KRASS
and TORCZON, Administrative Patent Judges.
TORCZON, Administrative Patent Judge.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
FINDINGS OF FACT
We have reviewed the record in its entirety in light of the
arguments of Appellants and the examiner. Our decision presumes
familiarity with the entire record. A preponderance of the
evidence of record supports each of the following fact findings.
A. The nature of the case
1. Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the final
rejection of claims 2, 3, and 17-29. (Paper 18.)
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007