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not binding precedent of the Board.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. 36
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte ELLIOTT J. SIFF
__________
Appeal No. 1996-2918
Application 08/164,879
___________
HEARD: March 23, 2000
___________
Before KIMLIN, JOHN D. SMITH and OWENS, Administrative Patent
Judges.
OWENS, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal from the examiner’s second rejection of
claims 19-21, which are all of the claims remaining in the
application.1
1Claims 20 and 21 were submitted when the present
continuation-in-part application was filed. However, the
continuation-in-part specification has not been substituted
for the parent case specification, and claims 20 and 21 have
1
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007