Ex parte GILPATRICK - 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               journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 11                           

                                 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                                                        

                                       BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                                                         
                                                   AND INTERFERENCES                                                              

                                            Ex parte MICHAEL W. GILPATRICK                                                        

                                                     Appeal No. 1997-4392                                                         
                                                  Application No. 08/639,515                                                      

                                                           ON BRIEF                                                               

               Before FRANKFORT, NASE and JENNIFER D. BAHR,  Administrative Patent Judges.                                        

               FRANKFORT, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                                            

                                                   DECISION ON APPEAL                                                             

                      This is a decision on appeal from the examiner’s refusal to allow claims 12-16 in the final                 

               rejection (Paper No. 7, mailed February 7, 1997).  Claims 1-11 have been canceled.                                 

                      Appellant’s invention relates to a method of producing a fabric 10 made of a plurality of core              

               and effect yarns 54 with loops 53.  A plurality of core and effect yarns 54 are maintained spaced from             


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

Last modified: November 3, 2007