Ex parte ESMON et al. - Page 1




                        The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written for publication        
                                            and is not binding precedent of the Board.                                    
                                                                                                Paper No. 42              
                                UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                                                 
                                                      ____________                                                        
                                     BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                                                   
                                                 AND INTERFERENCES                                                        
                                                      ____________                                                        
                                  Ex parte CHARLES T. ESMON, NAOMI L. ESMON,                                              
                                              DEBORAH J. STEARNS and                                                      
                                               SHINICHIRO KUROSAWA                                                        
                                                      ____________                                                        
                                                  Appeal No. 1997-0483                                                    
                                               Application No. 07/648,9001                                                
                                                      ____________                                                        
                                                        ON BRIEF                                                          
                                                      ____________                                                        
              Before ROBINSON, SPIEGEL, and SCHEINER, Administrative Patent Judges.                                       
              SPIEGEL, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                                       


                                                 DECISION ON APPEAL                                                       
                     This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C.  134 from the examiner finally                         
              rejecting claims 5, 6, 13, 16, 19, 21 and 22 and refusing to allow claim 20 as amended                      
              subsequent to the final rejection, which are all of the claims pending in this application.2                



                     1 Application for patent filed January 31, 1991.  According to appellants, this application is a     
              continuation-in-part of application 07/214,774 filed July 5, 1988, now abandoned.                           
                     2Entry of the amendment filed May 13, 1996 (Paper No. 40) amending claim 20 was authorized by        
              the examiner in the communication mailed June 11, 1996 (Paper No. 41).  However, the amendment has          
              not been physically entered.  Therefore, upon return of the application to the jurisdiction of the examiner,
              this clerical oversight should be corrected.                                                                





Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007