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publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 23
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte DAVID S. BOMSE, D. CHRISTIAN HOVDE,
and JOEL A. SILVER
____________
Appeal No. 1998-1814
Application No. 08/347,814
____________
HEARD: November 29, 2000
____________
Before HAIRSTON, GROSS, and LEVY, Administrative Patent Judges.
LEVY, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal from the examiner’s final
rejection of claims 110-1771, which are all of the claims
pending in this application.
1 The examiner (answer, page 2) states that “claims 115-116, 149-150
are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be
allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of
the base claim and any intervening claims.” We find this statement to be
inconsistent with the examiner’s rejection of these claims under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, second paragraph (answer, page 3). We presume that the examiner meant
to say that claims 115-116 and 149-150 would be allowed if rewritten in
independent form and to overcome their indefiniteness.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007