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publication in a law journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 21
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_____________
Ex parte GREGORY L. HEACOCK, GORDON B. KUENSTER and
KEVIN W. SHIMASAKI
_____________
Appeal No. 96-3577
Application 08/419,0641
______________
ON BRIEF2
_______________
Before JERRY SMITH, RUGGIERO and DIXON, Administrative Patent Judges.
DIXON, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal from the Examiner's final rejection of claims 1-18, 20-
3
37 and 39-49 which are all of the claims pending in this application .
1Application for patent filed April 10, 1995. According to appellants, this application is a
continuation of application 08/133,518, filed October 7, 1993. Now abandoned.
2We note that an oral hearing was requested, but was waived by appellants in a letter filed April 19,
1999. (Paper no. 20).
3We note that the Examiner modified the rejection in the examiner's answer. The Examiner
indicated that claim 47 is allowable and that claims 4-5, 9, 15-16, 21-22, 25, 29-30, 32-36 and 46 would be
1
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007