Ex parte CASTEEL 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          (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 22              

                      UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                       
                                    _____________                                     
                         BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                           
                                  AND INTERFERENCES                                   
                                    _____________                                     
                       Ex parte DONALD CASTEEL and JOHN MULLER                        
                                   _____________                                      
                                Appeal No. 1997-0074                                  
                             Application No. 08/123,092                               
                                   ______________                                     
                                      ON BRIEF                                        
                                   _______________                                    

          Before ABRAMS, STAAB, and MCQUADE, Administrative Patent                    
          Judges.                                                                     
          ABRAMS, Administrative Patent Judge.                                        

                                 DECISION ON APPEAL                                   
               This is an appeal from the decision of the examiner                    
          finally rejecting claims 1-8 and 11-20.  Claims 9 and 10 have               
          been allowed.                                                               
               The appellants' invention is directed to a method of                   

                                          1                                           





Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007