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journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 42
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte GERARD RAGUENET
__________
Appeal No. 96-0625
Application 08/044,1131
___________
HEARD: March 9, 1999
___________
Before KRASS, BARRETT and FRAHM, Administrative Patent Judges.
FRAHM, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Appellant has appealed to the Board from the examiner’s final rejection of claims 9, 10, and 15
to 17. Claims 1 to 8 have been canceled. In the final rejection (page 4, paragraph 7), the examiner2
Application for patent filed April 8, 1993. According to appellant, the application is a continuation of1
Application 07/779,240, filed October 18, 1991, now abandoned.
Claims 1 to 8 were canceled in parent application number 07/779,240 as per appellant’s instructions at page2
3 of an amendment dated September 16, 1992.
1
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007