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for publication in a law journal and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 37
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte STEPHEN E. CRANE, LEEANN HERRINGER,
MICHAEL SHINSKY, GERALD A. RAITZER,
MICHAEL A. OGRINC, and STEVEN T. MAYER
____________
Appeal No. 1998-1397
Application No. 08/482,905
____________
ON BRIEF
____________
Before KRASS, FLEMING, and BARRY, Administrative Patent Judges.
BARRY, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from
the rejection of claims 21-42. We reverse.
BACKGROUND
The invention at issue in this appeal relates to video
editing. Various methods of video editing are well known.
For tape-based editing, an editor cycles source tapes back and
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007