Ex parte GLOTON 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          (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 41              
                     UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                        
                                   _______________                                    
                         BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                           
                                  AND INTERFERENCES                                   
                                   _______________                                    
                            Ex parte JEAN-PIERRE GLOTON                               
                                 and PHILLIPE PERES                                   
                                   ______________                                     
                                 Appeal No. 97-0819                                   
                               Application 08/252,0631                                
                                   _______________                                    
                                      ON BRIEF                                        
                                   _______________                                    
          Before GARRIS, WARREN and WALTZ, Administrative Patent Judges.              
          WARREN, Administrative Patent Judge.                                        
                                 Decision on Appeal                                   
               This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C.  134 from the decision              
          of the examiner finally rejecting claims 1 through 28.  Claims              
          1 through 9 were subsequently allowed by the examiner, leaving              
          claims 10 through 28 for our consideration on appeal.  Claims               
          10 and 21 are illustrative of the claims on appeal:                         
               10. An electronic component support for a memory card                  
          which has a cavity to house said component, said support                    
                                                                                     
          1  Application for patent filed June 1, 1994. According to                  
          appellants, this application is a continuation of application               
          07/919,047, filed July 23, 1992, which is a reissue of U.S.                 
          Patent No. 4,943,464, maturing from application 07/278,979,                 
          filed December 1, 1988.                                                     

                                     - 1 -                                            



Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007