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journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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 KENNETH D. ROGERS and RANDOLPH B. ROBINSON
____________
Appeal No. 96-3611
Application No. 08/306,6881
____________
ON BRIEF
____________
Before THOMAS, HAIRSTON and BARRETT, Administrative Patent
Judges.
HAIRSTON, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims 1
through 6, 8 and 9. In a first Amendment After Final (paper
number 7), claims 1, 4 and 9 were amended, and claims 2 and 3
were canceled. In response to this amendment, the examiner
allowed claims 4 and 9 (paper number 8). In a second Amendment
After Final (paper number 10), claims 4 and 8 were amended. In a
third Amendment After Final (paper number 14), claims 5 and 6
1Application for patent filed September 15, 1994.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007