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journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 31
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
________________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
________________
Ex parte JOSEPH A. BERNARDO and BARRY L. NATALE
________________
Appeal No. 96-1032
Application 08/197,4431
________________
ON BRIEF
________________
Before CALVERT, MEISTER and ABRAMS, Administrative Patent Judges.
CALVERT, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims 2 to 6,
8, 19 to 21, 23 and 25, all the claims remaining in the
application.
Claims 2 to 6, 8 and 23 are drawn to a method for making a
distinction or identifying code on an article for automated
1Application for patent filed February 16, 1994.
According to applicants, the application is a continuation of
Application 07/868,525, filed April 15, 1992, now abandoned.
-1-
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007