Ex parte SETZER et al. - Page 1






                                             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                                           (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 18                                          

                                               UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                                                                                               
                                                                              _______________                                                                                          

                                                       BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                                                                                              
                                                                        AND INTERFERENCES                                                                                              
                                                                              _______________                                                                                          

                                               Ex parte WILLIAM C. SETZER, RICHARD J. MALLLIRIS,                                                                                       
                                            GARY W. BOONE, FRANK P. KOCH and DAVID K. YOUNG                                                                                            
                                                                              ______________                                                                                           

                                                                           Appeal No. 1996-3587                                                                                        
                                                                          Application 08/401,043                                                                                       
                                                                              _______________                                                                                          

                                                                                   ON BRIEF                                                                                            
                                                                              _______________                                                                                          

                     Before JOHN D. SMITH, WARREN and KRATZ, Administrative Patent Judges.                                                                                             

                     WARREN, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                                                                                              
                                                                   Decision on Appeal and Opinion                                                                                      
                                This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C.  134 from the decision of the examiner refusing to allow                                                            
                     claims 1, 31 through 46, 49, 51 through 60 and 70 through 72 as amended subsequent to the final                                                                   
                     rejection.1                                                                                                                                                       
                                We have carefully considered the record before us, and based thereon, find that we cannot                                                              
                     sustain the sole ground of rejection of the appealed claims advanced on appeal under 35 U.S.C.                                                                   



                     1Amendment of December 6, 1995 (Paper No. 10).                                                                                                                    
                                                                                   - 1 -                                                                                               




Page:  1  2  3  4  5  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007