Ex Parte WILLIAMS et al - Page 1




                    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               journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 38           
                     UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                        
                                    ____________                                      
                         BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                           
                                  AND INTERFERENCES                                   
                                    ____________                                      
            Ex parte KENNETH A. WILLIAMS, DAVID R. SLAYBACK, MATTHEW D.               
                          GEORGE and JEFFREY A. STEPHENSON                            
                                    ____________                                      
                                 Appeal No. 96-1647                                   
                             Application No. 08/149,0261                              
                                    ____________                                      
                                      ON BRIEF                                        
                                    ____________                                      
          Before HAIRSTON, BARRETT, and GROSS, Administrative Patent                  
          Judges.                                                                     
          HAIRSTON, Administrative Patent Judge.                                      



                                 DECISION ON APPEAL                                   
               This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims 7                 
          through 16 and 27 through 37.  In a first Amendment After Final             
          (paper number 23), claim 33 was amended.  As a result of the                
          amendment, the examiner allowed claim 33 (paper number 24).  In a           
          second Amendment After Final (paper number 26), claim 11 was                


               1 Application for patent filed November 8, 1993.  According            
          to appellants, the application is a continuation of Application             
          No. 07/656,292, filed February 15, 1991, now abandoned.                     





Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007