Ex parte BRAULT et al. - Page 1

                             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                     journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 22                     

                               UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                                                  
                                    BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                                                    
                                                AND INTERFERENCES                                                         
                            Ex parte DONALD A. BRAULT, DOUGLAS A. CAHILL,                                                 
                              RICHARD S. HIMMELWRIGHT and DENE H. TAYLOR                                                  
                                                Appeal No. 97-0222                                                        
                                            Application 08/115,5611                                                       
                                                       ON BRIEF                                                           
              Before KIMLIN, WEIFFENBACH and ELLIS, Administrative Patent                                                 
              KIMLIN, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                                        

                                                DECISION ON APPEAL                                                        
                     This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims 1-37,                                           
              42, 43 and 44, all the claims remaining in the present                                                      
              application.  Claim 1 is illustrative:                                                                      
                     1.  A process for preparing a protected ink image comprising                                         
                     A) imagewise depositing one or more ink images on an ink                                             
              receptor, the ink receptor comprising                                                                       

                     1Application for patent filed September 3, 1993.                                                     

Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007