The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written for publication and is not
binding precedent of the Board.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. 28
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_____________
Ex parte NICOLAAS P. WILLARD, HENRICUS J.A.P. VAN DEN BOOGAARD,
CORNELIS H.J. VAN DEN BREKEL, and ELISABETH VANDERSLUIS
_____________
Appeal No. 1998-0754
Application No. 08/652,2531
______________
ON BRIEF
_______________
Before McKELVEY, PAK, and TIERNEY, Administrative Patent Judges.
TIERNEY, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the examiner’s refusal to allow
1Application for patent filed May 23, 1996. This application is a continuation under
35 U.S.C. § 120 of U.S. Application No. 08/321,187 filed October 11, 1994, which claims priority
under 35 U.S.C. § 119 to Belgium application 93-01063 filed October 11, 1993. The real party in
interest is U.S. Philips Corporation. Philips Electronics N.V. is the ultimate parent of U.S. Philips
Corporation.
1
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007