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(2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 16
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_______________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_______________
Ex parte KEN J. CHIANG
______________
Appeal No. 1996-2398
Application 08/140,8401
_______________
ON BRIEF
_______________
Before DOWNEY, WARREN and ELLIS, 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 refusing to allow
claims 1 and 3 through 5 as amended subsequent to the final rejection. These are all of the claims
remaining in the application as claim 2 was canceled subsequent to the final rejection.2
We have carefully considered the record before us, and based thereon, find that we cannot
1Application for patent filed October 25, 1993.
2Amendment of March 6, 1995 (Paper No. 9). We observe that while the examiner stated that this
amendment would be entered upon the filing of an appeal in his advisory action of March 14, 1995
(Paper No. 10), the amendment has not been clerically entered.
- 1 -
Page: 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007