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(2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 21
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_______________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_______________
Ex parte JOHN D. BASIL,
CHIA-CHENG LIN, ROBERT M. HUNIA
and HELMUT FRNZA
______________
Appeal No. 95-4201
Application 07/799,8051
_______________
ON BRIEF
_______________
Before KIMLIN, WARREN and OWENS, Administrative Patent Judges.
WARREN, Administrative Patent Judge.
Decision on Appeal and Opinion
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. ' 134 from the decision of the examiner finally rejecting
claims 1, 2, 11, 12, 14 and 15, and refusing to allow claims 3, 4 and 16 as amended
subsequent to the final rejection.2
1 Application for patent filed November 29, 1991. According to appellants, this application is a
continuation-in-part of application 07/546,069, filed June 29, 1990, now abandoned, and a
continuation-in-part of application 07/546,484, filed June 29, 1990, now Patent No. 5,344,712, issued
September 6, 1994, and a continuation-in-part of application 07/500,642, filed March 28, 1990, now
U.S. Patent 5,401,579, issued March 28, 1995, which latter application is a continuation-in-part of
application 07/133,831, filed December 16, 1987, now abandoned.
2 See the amendment of April 11, 1994 (Paper No. 11) that has been entered as indicated by the
- 1 -
Page: 1 2 3 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007