Appeal No. 97-4166
Application No. 08/478,647
claimed. However, has we have noted above, this was a
typographical error and "30" should have been -- 36 --. The
surface 36 of Parish is clearly on the container and, for the
same reasons set forth above concerning the surface 30 in
rejection (I), can be considered to be "substantially
vertical."
The appellant's request is granted to the extent of
reconsideration and modification of the decision with respect
to the above-noted typographical error, but is denied with
respect to making any other changes therein.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in
connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR
§ 1.136(a).
DENIED
IAN A. CALVERT )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
JAMES M. MEISTER ) APPEALS
Administrative Patent Judge ) AND
) INTERFERENCES
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007