Ex parte NILSSEN - 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                     not binding precedent of the Board.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. 15                                          
                                               UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                                                                                               
                                                      BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                                                                                               
                                                                         AND INTERFERENCES                                                                                             
                                                                  Ex parte OLE K. NILSSEN                                                                                              
                                                                     Appeal No. 1997-2289                                                                                              
                                                                   Application 08/395,691                                                                                              
                                                                                  ON BRIEF                                                                                             
                     Before JERRY SMITH, FLEMING, and LALL, Administrative Patent                                                                                                      
                     LALL, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                                                                                                

                                                                        DECISION ON APPEAL                                                                                             
                                This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C.  134 from                                                                                                
                     the final rejection  of claims 1 to 19, which constitute all1                                                                                                                        

                                1 An amendment after the final rejection was filed [paper                                                                                              
                     no. 6].  It made no changes to the claims, however, it                                                                                                            
                     contained two affidavits questioning the validity of one of                                                                                                       
                     the applied references.  The Examiner, in advisory action                                                                                                         
                     [paper no. 7], commented on the two affidavits as “[i]t is                                                                                                        
                     improper for the Examiner to comment on the validity of a                                                                                                         
                     patent” citing 35 U.S.C.  282.  This issue is, however, not                                                                                                      
                     relevant to this decision.                                                                                                                                        

Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007