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journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 7
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte MARIS J. ZIEMELIS and WILLIAM R. R. PARK
____________
Appeal No. 95-3398
Application No. 08/103,3181
____________
ON BRIEF
____________
Before CAROFF, Administrative Patent Judge, McKELVEY, Senior
Administrative Patent Judge and OWENS, Administrative Patent
Judge.
CAROFF, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This decision on appeal relates to the final rejection of
claims 27-34, all the claims remaining in the involved
application.
1Application for patent filed August 9, 1993. According to
the appellants, the application is a continuation of Application
No. 07/926,619, filed August 10, 1992, which is a division of
Application No. 07/563,123, filed August 6, 1990, now Patent
No. 5,026,781, which is a division of Application No. 07/460,771,
filed January 4, 1990, now Patent No. 5,135,989, which is a
division of Application No. 07/334,501, filed April 7, 1989, now
Patent No. 4,898,913.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007