The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written for
publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.
Paper No. 39
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte EUGENE A. MIZUSAWA,
SUSAN A. ANDERSON, MAHA Y. EL-SAYED,
DANIEL R. LEISKE, RICHARD J. WIERSEMA, and CHIHAE YANG
__________
Appeal No. 1996-0906
Application 08/110,241
__________
ON BRIEF
__________
Before WILLIAM F. SMITH, SPIEGEL, and ADAMS, Administrative Patent Judges.
ADAMS, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on the appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the examiner’s
final rejection of claims 1 and 5-25, which are all the claims pending in the
application.
Claim 11 is illustrative of the subject matter on appeal and is reproduced
below:
1 We note appellants’ amendment under 37 CFR § 1.193(b) (Paper No. 33,
received December 4, 1995). In this amendment appellants amended claims 1
1
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007