The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written for
publication in a law journal and is not binding precedent of the Board.
Paper No. 25
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte FRANK BECHER and THOMAS KISSEL
____________
Appeal No. 1997-2336
Application No. 08/256,0651
____________
HEARD JULY 11, 2000
____________
Before WILLIAM F. SMITH, Administrative Patent Judge, McKELVEY, Senior
Administrative Patent Judge, and ROBINSON, Administrative Patent Judge.
ROBINSON, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the final rejection of claims
27 - 36. Claims 19-26 remain pending but are not now subject to rejection or objection.2
1This application was filed on August 4, 1994 under the provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 371 as a national
stage application of PCT/EP92/02914 which was filed December 16, 1992. Therefore, the present
application has an effective filing date of December 16, 1992. (35 U.S.C. § 363; 37 CFR § 1.495).
2We find no explicit statement by the examiner indicating that claims 19-26 are allowable. We
note the examiner's statement, in the Examiner's Answer (Answer) of September 4, 1996 (Paper No. 17),
that "The statement of the status of claims contained in the brief is correct. (Answer, page 1). Appellants
indicate that "[p]resumably, claims 19-26 therefore will have been found allowable." Therefore, it is our
understanding that these claims are not before us.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007