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was not written for publication in a law journal and (2) is not
binding precedent of the Board.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. 29
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte ROBERT C. MARTIN, PHILLIP RAMBOSEK,
WILLIAM J. VANDERHEYDEN, JOHN W. LOUKS, DONALD L. POCHARDT
and SATINDER K. NAYAR
__________
Appeal No. 97-0145
Application 08/073,3271
__________
ON BRIEF
__________
Before MEISTER, ABRAMS and STAAB, Administrative Patent Judges.
ABRAMS, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal from the decision of the examiner finally
rejecting claims 1 through 9 and 11 through 14. At that point,
remaining claims 10 and 15 through 22 had been withdrawn by the
examiner as being directed to a nonelected invention. After
1Application for patent filed June 8, 1993.
1
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007