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and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 26
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte FRANK M. LA DUCA
____________
Appeal No. 1996-1811
Application No. 08/169,9681
____________
ON BRIEF
____________
Before WINTERS, WILLIAM F. SMITH, and SPIEGEL, Administrative Patent Judges.
SPIEGEL, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the examiner's final
rejection of claims 1 through 24, which are all of the claims pending in this application.
Claims 1, 14 and 20 are illustrative and are attached as an appendix to this decision.
1Application for patent filed December 17, 1993. According to appellant, this application is a
continuation of Application 07/978,190 filed November 18, 1992, now abandoned, which is a continuation of
Application 07/758,741 filed September 12, 1991, now abandoned, which is a divisional of Application
07/583,164 filed September 17, 1990, now U.S. Patent 5,089,415, issued February 18, 1992.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007