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not binding precedent of the Board.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. 24
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte STEVEN M. HOFFMAN, TIMOTHY M. GARTON and DAWN M.
GALECKI
__________
Appeal No. 1997-0384
Application 08/086,498
___________
ON BRIEF
___________
Before HAIRSTON, JERRY SMITH and FRAHM, Administrative Patent
Judges.
FRAHM, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Appellants have appealed to the Board from the examiner’s
final rejection of claims 1, 6 to 9, 11, 12, 15, 18, 20, and
21. Claims 2 to 5, 10, 13, 14, 16, 17, and 19 have been
canceled.
BACKGROUND
The subject matter on appeal is directed to the field of
liquid crystal display (LCD) devices, and particularly to a
1
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007