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was not written for publication in a law journal and (2) is not
binding precedent of the Board.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. 16
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte THOMAS W. HOLMQUIST-BROWN and PETER O. REKOW
____________
Appeal No. 1997-0153
Application No. 08/375,681
____________
ON BRIEF
____________
Before COHEN, NASE, and LAZARUS, Administrative Patent Judges.
LAZARUS, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal from the examiner's final
rejection of claims 1-4 and 6-16 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.1
We affirm.
1 At pages 1-2 of the examiner’s answer it is correctly noted that “The
statement of the status of the claims contained in the brief is incorrect…
this appeal involves claims 1-4 and 6-16… claim 5 has been indicated to be
allowable when written in independent form.”
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007