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publication in a law journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 11
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte ROGER E. NEFF
and RODERICK G. RYLES
__________
Appeal No. 1996-2115
Application 08/180,9331
___________
ON BRIEF
___________
Before DOWNEY, WILLIAM F. SMITH and LORIN, Administrative Patent Judges.
DOWNEY, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the final rejection of claims 1, 4-5, 8,
10, 13, 23, 26-27 and 29, all of the claims pending in the application. The subject matter
on appeal is directed to highly branched, water-soluble, high molecular weight
1 Application for patent filed January 11, 1994. According to the appellants, the
application is a continuation of Application 07/643,309, filed January 22, 1991,
abandoned; which is a continuation of Application 285,931, filed December 19, 1988,
abandoned.
1
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007