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was not written for publication and is not binding precedent of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. 13
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_______________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_______________
Ex parte ALAIN VIRON
______________
Appeal No. 1997-1796
Application 08/422,491
_______________
ON BRIEF
_______________
Before GARRIS, WARREN and TIMM, 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 12.1
We have carefully considered the record before us, and based thereon, find that we cannot
sustain any of the grounds of rejection advanced by the examiner in the answer. With respect to the
ground of rejection of the appealed claims under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph (answer, page 3),
we cannot agree with the examiner’s position that the introductory phrase “[i]n an extruder assembly”
renders the appealed claims indefinite, because we find no basis in the plain language of the appealed
claims, when interpreted in light of appellant’s specification as it would
- 1 -
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007