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journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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