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was not written for publication in a law journal and (2) is not
binding precedent of the Board.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 ROBERT A. MEGER
__________
Appeal No. 96-3037
Application No. 08/252,4741
__________
ON BRIEF
__________
Before ABRAMS, STAAB and CRAWFORD, Administrative Patent Judges.
ABRAMS, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal from the decision of the examiner finally
rejecting claims 1-3, 5-8 and 10-12. At this point, claim 4 had
been allowed and claim 9 indicated as containing allowable
subject matter. Subsequent to the final rejection, an amendment
was entered which resulted in claim 9 being allowed (Paper No.
13).
1Application for patent filed June 1, 1994.
1
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007