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opinion in support of the decision being entered today (1) was not written for publication in a law journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 16 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE ________________ BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS AND INTERFERENCES ________________ Ex parte ROBERT D. MAHONEY, JIRO KAWAMOTO, RICHARD A. LUNDGARD, MARK F. SONNENSCHEIN, HAWK S. WAN and H. NELSON BECK ________________ Appeal No. 95-4970 Application No. 08/012,8721 ________________ ON BRIEF ________________ Before KIMLIN, GARRIS and PAK, Administrative Patent Judges. KIMLIN, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims 1-21 and 23-39, all the claims remaining in the present application. Claim 1 is illustrative: 1Application for patent filed February 3, 1993. According to appellants, this application is a continuation-in-part of Application No. 07/746,756, filed August 19, 1991, now U.S. Patent No. 5,246,647, issued September 21, 1993; which is a continuation-in-part of Application No. 07/329,666, filed March 28, 1989, now U.S. Patent No. 5,043,112, issued August 27, 1991. -1-Page: 1 2 3 4 5 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007