Ex parte MICHAEL D. BECK et al. - Page 1




                    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               (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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