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was not written for publication in a law journal and (2) is not
binding precedent of the Board.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. 13
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte DAVID S. SUMIDA and DENNIS C. JONES
__________
Appeal No. 95-4470
Application No. 08/223,1901
__________
ON BRIEF
__________
Before THOMAS, HAIRSTON and KRASS, Administrative Patent Judges.
KRASS, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal from the final rejection of
claims 1 through 3, 10 and 17 through 22, all of the claims
remaining in the application.
The invention is directed to a monolithic multifunctional
optical element. More particularly, the optical element has a
body made of a material with a refractive index greater than
1Application for patent filed April 5, 1994.
1
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007