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for publication in a law journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 31
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte DANIEL C. SHAW and DONALD F. BUSH
____________
Appeal No. 1996-3525
Application No. 08/089,5951
____________
HEARD: February 9, 1999
____________
Before COHEN, FRANKFORT, and NASE, Administrative Patent Judges.
NASE, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal from the examiner's final
rejection of claims 1 through 3, 7, 10 and 11. Claims 5, 6,
8, 9 and 12 through 15 have been objected to as depending from
a non-allowed claim. Claims 16 through 26 have been withdrawn
1Application for patent filed July 12, 1993. According to
the appellants, the application is a continuation of
Application No. 07/822,201, filed January 17, 1992, now
abandoned, which was a continuation-in-part of Application No.
07/800,718, filed December 3, 1991, now abandoned, which was a
continuation of Application No. 07/607,275, filed October 31,
1990, now abandoned, which was a division of Application No.
07/382,113, filed July 20, 1989, now U.S. Patent No.
4,985,944.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007