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(2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 15
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_______________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_______________
Ex parte DALE R. SHACKLE
______________
Appeal No. 1997-0460
Application 08/207,990
_______________
ON BRIEF
_______________
Before CAROFF, JOHN D. SMITH and WARREN, 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 finally rejecting
claims 1 through 12 and 23 through 30, which are all of the claims in the application.1
We have carefully considered the record before us, and based thereon, find that we cannot
sustain the ground of rejection of the appealed claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Shackle et al.
(Shackle) in view of Jow et al.2 (answer, pages 2.5-3). As an initial matter we interpret claims 1 and 2,
which are representative of the appealed claims, in light of appellant’s specification as it would be
1 See the specification, pages 24-25, and the amendment of March 20, 1995 (Paper No. 3; pages 2-
3).
- 1 -
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007