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for publication in a law journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 19
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte IMANTS R. LAUKS and JOSEPH W. ROGERS
____________
Appeal No. 1998-1786
Application No. 08/486,1501
____________
ON BRIEF
____________
Before McCANDLISH, Senior Administrative Patent Judge, MEISTER
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 36, 38 through 46 and 67 through 69.
Claims 47 through 50 and 70 have been objected to as depending
1Application for patent filed June 6, 1995. According to
the appellants, the application is a division of Application
No. 08/144,966, filed October 28, 1993, now abandoned.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007