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journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 14
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte GOPAL K. SRIVASTAVA and PETER C. SKERLOS
____________
Appeal No. 95-4131
Application No. 08/089,3201
____________
ON BRIEF
____________
Before HAIRSTON, BARRETT and TORCZON, Administrative Patent
Judges.
HAIRSTON, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims 1
through 8.
The disclosed invention relates to a method and apparatus
for operating an interactive video communications system.
Claim 1 is illustrative of the claimed invention, and it
reads as follows:
1Application for patent filed July 9, 1993.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007