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and is not binding precedent of the Board.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