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publication in a law journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 27
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte RICHARD W. HARRISON
and JOHN F. SCARZELLO
__________
Appeal No. 95-4662
Application 08/048,1011
___________
ON BRIEF
___________
Before THOMAS, FLEMING and CARMICHAEL, Administrative Patent Judges.
CARMICHAEL, Administrative Patent Judge.
ON REQUEST FOR REHEARING
This is a decision on a request for rehearing filed July 23, 1998 (Paper No. 26),
of our Decision dated July 14, 1998 (Paper No. 25). Appellants argue that: (1) our
decision is confusingly characterized as an amplification of the examiner’s reasons
whereas in fact the opinion is inconsistent with the examiner’s reasoning and presents
1Application for patent filed April 16, 1993.
1
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007