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written for publication in a law journal and (2) is not binding precedent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. 25
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte JAMES A. SIMMONS
____________
Appeal No. 1998-2032
Application No. 08/410,048
____________
ON BRIEF
____________
Before McCANDLISH, Senior Administrative Patent Judge, and
COHEN and GONZALES, Administrative Patent Judges.
McCANDLISH, Senior Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on an appeal from the examiner=s
final rejection of claims 1-24.1 No other claims are
pending in the application.
1 Subsequent to the final rejection (Paper No. 6 mailed November 19,
1996), claims 1 and 24 were amended in Paper No. 7 filed February 24,
1997 and claim 15 was amended in Paper No. 22 filed March 15, 1999 to
remove indefinite claim language from the independent claims. Although
the examiner has indicated in the letter filed February 9, 1999 (Paper
No. 20) in response to our remand (Paper No. 19), that the amendment to
claim 15 would be entered upon being submitted in a paper separate from
the reply brief, the record does not show as yet that this amendment
has been formally entered. We nevertheless presume that the amendment
to claim 15 has been entered in view of the fact that the rejection of
claim 15 and the other appealed claims under the second paragraph of 35
U.S.C. ' 112 has not been carried forward and restated in the examiner=s
supplemental answer (Paper No. 16). We therefore presume that the
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007