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opinion in support of the decision being entered today (1) was not written for publication in a law journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 20 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE ____________ BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS AND INTERFERENCES ____________ Ex parte ROBERT C.U. YU and RICHARD L. POST ____________ Appeal No. 95-3749 Application No. 07/953,6191 ____________ ON BRIEF ____________ Before KIMLIN, PAK and OWENS, Administrative Patent Judges. PAK, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL This is a decision on an appeal from the examiner’s refusal to allow claims 2, 3, 6 through 13, 21, 23 and 25 through 30, which are all of the claims remaining in the application. Claims 3, 6 through 13, 21 and 26 were amended subsequent to final rejection. Claims 21 and 26 are representative of the subject matter on appeal and read as follows: 1Application for patent filed September 30, 1992.Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007