Ex parte RICH - 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                                                   not binding precedent of the Board.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. 18              
                                  UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                                                     
                                       BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                                                       
                                                    AND INTERFERENCES                                                           
                                                 Ex parte CHRISTINE A. RICH                                                     
                                                     Appeal No. 1999-0113                                                       
                                                   Application No. 08/472,321                                                   
                                                           ON BRIEF                                                             
               Before COHEN, NASE, and BAHR, Administrative Patent Judges.                                                      
               BAHR, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                                               

                                                    DECISION ON APPEAL                                                          
                      This is a decision on appeal from the examiner's final rejection of claims 5-16 and 49-                   
               51.  Claims 1-4, the only other claims pending in this application, stand withdrawn from further                 
               consideration under 37 CFR  1.142(b) as being directed to a non-elected invention.  We note                     
               that the appellant requested cancellation of claims 17-48, at the top of the "Request Form for                   
               Continuation or Divisional Application Under 37 CFR  1.60" filed June 7, 1995 (Paper No.                        
               1), but a review of the application file reveals that this amendment has not been physically                     

Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007