Ex parte GUTTAG 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                                                       publication in a law journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 33                                

                                                       UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                                                                                                                 

                                                                BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                                                                                                               
                                                                                    AND INTERFERENCES                                                                                                            

                                                                               Ex parte KARL M. GUTTAG,                                                                                                          
                                                                              CARRELL R. KILLEBREW, JR.                                                                                                          
                                                                                  and JERRY R. VAN AKEN                                                                                                          

                                                                                      Appeal No. 1997-0400                                                                                                       
                                                                                  Application No. 08/080,735                                                                                                     

                                                                                                 ON BRIEF                                                                                                        

                        Before RUGGIERO, HECKER, and DIXON, Administrative Patent Judges.                                                                                                                        
                        DIXON, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                                                                                                                      

                                                                                    DECISION ON APPEAL                                                                                                           

                                    This is a decision on appeal from the examiner's final rejection of claims 34, 37, 40                                                                                        

                        and 51 -54, which are all of the claims pending in this application.                                                                                                                     

                                    We REVERSE.                                                                                                                                                                  

                                    1We note that claim 51 was originally presented on Dec. 10, 1992.  The claim set forth that either                                                                           
                        the look-up data or the majority bits were selected to be displayed.  On June 22, 1993, “majority” was                                                                                   
                        amended to recite “minority” in the penultimate line without discussion thereof.  This does not appear                                                                                   
                        correct in light of the embodiment in Figure 56 and discussion at page 97 of the specification.                                                                                          

Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007