Ex parte WOOD et al. - 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                                         publication in a law journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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 CLIFTON W. WOOD JR. and JOHN R. TUTTLE                                                                           

                                                                   Appeal No. 1999-0526                                                                             
                                                                Application No. 08/581,9371                                                                         

                                                                            ON BRIEF                                                                                

                   Before THOMAS, HAIRSTON, and DIXON, Administrative Patent Judges.                                                                                
                   DIXON, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                                                                              

                                                                  DECISION ON APPEAL                                                                                

                            This is a decision on appeal from the examiner's final rejection of claims 1-11,                                                        

                   which are all of the claims pending in this application.                                                                                         

                            We REVERSE.                                                                                                                             

                            1Application for patent filed January 2, 1996.  According to appellants, this application is a                                          
                   continuation and/or continuation-in-part of many previous applications, the specifics of which are not                                           
                   deemed necessary for a determination of any issues in this case.  Accordingly, these prior applications are                                      
                   not listed herein.                                                                                                                               

Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007