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journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 29
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
________________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
________________
Ex parte EUGENE G. SOMMERFELD and FRANK L. SCHADT III
________________
Appeal No. 95-3734
Application No. 08/043,6201
________________
ON BRIEF
________________
Before WINTERS, OWENS and WEIMAR, Administrative Patent Judges.
WINTERS, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This appeal was taken from the examiner's decision rejecting
claims 1 through 23, 40 through 42 and 99. Claims 24 through 39
and 46 through 98, which are the only other claims remaining in
1Application for patent filed April 7, 1993. According
to appellants, this application is a continuation of Application
No. 07/662,539, filed February 28, 1991, now abandoned; which is
a continuation-in-part of Application No. 07/414,417, filed
September 29, 1989, now abandoned; which is a continuation-in-
part of Application No. 07/162,966, filed March 2, 1988, now
abandoned.
-1-
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007