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(2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 28
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_______________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_______________
Ex parte MARVIS E. HARTMAN, MASSIMO P. REI,
MICHELA CASTAGNONE and STEVEN A. HAMAY
______________
Appeal No. 95-4118
Application 07/600,7991
_______________
ON BRIEF
_______________
Before WARREN, OWENS and WALTZ, Administrative Patent Judges.
WARREN, Administrative Patent Judge.
Decision on Appeal and Opinion
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the decision of the examiner finally rejecting
claims 1 through 14, 17, 46 and 47. Appellants amended claims 1 through 11, 13, 14 and 47 and
canceled claims 12 and 46 subsequent to the examiner’s answer, which amendment was entered by2
the examiner. Therefore, claims 1 through 11, 13, 14, 17 and 47 remain for consideration on appeal.3
1Application for patent filed October 22, 1990.
2Amendment of May 13, 1993 (Paper No. 17). .
3Supplemental answer of September 30, 1994 (Paper No. 18) (first supplemental answer).
- 1 -
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007