Ex parte MALIK 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               journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the                        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. 16           
                      UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                       
                                    ____________                                      
                         BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                           
                                 AND INTERFERENCES                                    
                                    ____________                                      
             Ex parte JOHN H. MALIK, JOHN J. MIKULA and ROBERT A. JULIEN              
                                    ____________                                      
                                 Appeal No. 97-0677                                   
                             Application No. 08/312,7101                              
                                    ____________                                      
                                      ON BRIEF                                        
                                    ____________                                      
          Before McCANDLISH, Senior Administrative Patent Judge and                   
          McQUADE and NASE, Administrative Patent Judges.                             
          NASE, Administrative Patent Judge.                                          


                                 DECISION ON APPEAL                                   
               This is a decision on appeal from the examiner's final                 
          rejection of claims 1 through 4, which are all of the claims                
          pending in this application.  In the examiner's answer, the                 
          examiner allowed claim 4 and objected to claim 3 as depending               
          from a rejected claim.  Accordingly, claims 1 and 2 remain on               
          appeal.                                                                     


               Application for patent filed September 27, 1994.1                                                                     




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

Last modified: November 3, 2007