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(2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 20
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_______________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_______________
Ex parte MARK M. HASEGAWA, STEVEN A. DANEMAN,
RONALDO R. DeJESUS and HENRY W. BABEL
______________
Appeal No. 1996-3977
Application 08/232,6271
_______________
ON BRIEF
_______________
Before JOHN D. SMITH, WARREN and OWENS, Administrative Patent Judges.
WARREN, Administrative Patent Judge.
Decision on Appeal
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the decision of the examiner finally rejecting
claims 12 through 20 and refusing to allow claims 1 through 11 as amended subsequent to the final
rejection, which are all of the claims in the application. Claims 1 and 16 are illustrative of the claims on
appeal:
1. A coated article, comprising:
an article having a surface; and
1Application for patent filed April 25, 1994.
- 1 -
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007