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(2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 20
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_______________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_______________
Ex parte MICHAEL D. ADAMS,
DAVID W. AGER and GREGORY K. RHYNE
______________
Appeal No. 1997-1735
Application 08/391,668
_______________
HEARD: April 5, 2000
_______________
Before KIMLIN, 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, 4, 5 and 11 and refusing to allow claims 1 through 11 as amended subsequent to the final
rejection.1
We have carefully considered the record before us, and based thereon, find that we cannot
sustain the rejection of the appealed claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Harms.2 It is well settled that
1 Amendments of December 11, 1995 (Paper No. 4) and of May 23, 1996 (Paper No. 9).
2 Harm is cited at page 3 of the answer.
- 1 -
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007