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(2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 15
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte WILLIAM P. SCHMIDT and FRANKLIN D. HUTCHINSON
__________
Appeal No. 96-1419
Application 08/081,971 1
__________
ON BRIEF
__________
Before CALVERT, Administrative Patent Judge,
McCANDLISH, Senior Administrative Patent Judge and
FRANKFORT, Administrative Patent Judge.
McCANDLISH, Senior Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on an appeal from the examiner’s final
rejection of claims 1 through 9 and 12. No other claims are
Application for patent filed June 23, 1993. According to1
appellants, this application is a continuation-in-part of
Application 07/843,508, filed February 28, 1992, now U.S. Patent
No. 5,301,916, issued April 12, 1994, which is a continuation-in-
part of Application 07/419,213, filed October 10, 1989, now U.S.
Patent No. 5,106,049, issued April 21, 1992.
1
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007