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was not written for publication and is not binding precedent of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. 17
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_______________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_______________
Ex parte JOHN T. WHITE
and D. MORGAN TENCH
______________
Appeal No. 1997-0493
Application 08/336,353
_______________
ON BRIEF
_______________
Before PAK, WARREN and LIEBERMAN, 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 20.1
We have carefully considered the record before us, and based thereon, find that we
cannot sustain any of the three grounds of rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 based on the combined
teachings of Tench, Baxter and Riggs, which in one of the grounds of rejection are further combined
with Florence et al. (answer, pages 3-5).2
1 See specification, pages 10-13, and the amendment of June 12, 1995 (Paper No. 4).
2 The references relied on by the examiner are listed at pages 2-3 of the answer.
- 1 -
Page: 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007