Ex parte OLSON 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                 (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 38                                

                                       UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                                                                    
                                                              _______________                                                                       

                                             BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                                                                     
                                                           AND INTERFERENCES                                                                        
                                                              _______________                                                                       

                                           Ex parte KEITH E. OLSON, THOMAS R. OAKES,                                                                
                                           DANIEL N. TALLMAN and WILLIAM G. MIZUNO                                                                  
                                                               ______________                                                                       

                                                            Appeal No. 1997-0545                                                                    
                                                            Application 08/224,063                                                                  
                                                              _______________                                                                       

                                                             HEARD: June 5, 2000                                                                    
                                                              _______________                                                                       

                 Before PAK, WARREN and TIMM, Administrative Patent Judges.                                                                         

                 WARREN, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                                                               
                                                              Decision on Appeal                                                                    
                          This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the decision of the examiner finally rejecting                               
                 claims 92 through 102 and 104 through 113 and refusing to allow claim 103 as amended subsequent to                                 
                 the final rejection.  Claim 92 is illustrative of the claims on appeal:1                                                           
                          92.  A process for manufacturing an improved solid cast alkaline composition, said process                                
                 comprising the steps of:                                                                                                           


                                                                                                                                                    
                 1  We have reproduced claim 92 as it stands of record in the amendment of January 17, 1995 (Paper                                  
                 No. 25; page 2) wherein it includes the phrase “a alkali metal.”                                                                   

                                                                   - 1 -                                                                            



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

Last modified: November 3, 2007