Ex parte MATTISON - 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               (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 16           
                      UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                       
                                    ____________                                      
                         BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                           
                                 AND INTERFERENCES                                    
                                    ____________                                      
                             Ex parte RODNEY A. MATTISON                              
                                    ____________                                      
                                 Appeal No. 95-2218                                   
                               Application 07/902,073                                 
                                    ____________                                      
                                      ON BRIEF                                        
                                    ____________                                      
          Before THOMAS, HAIRSTON, 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 Appellant 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.   This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C.  134 from the final            
          rejection of claims 12-17.  (Paper 13.)  Appellant has canceled             
          claims 1-11 and 18.  (Paper 8 at 2.)  The examiner has allowed              
          claims 19-29.  (Paper 9 at 1.)  We reverse the rejection of                 






Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007