Ex parte CHESS - Page 1





           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                     publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 11         
                       UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                      
                                     ____________                                     
                          BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                          
                                   AND INTERFERENCES                                  
                                     ____________                                     
                               Ex parte STANLEY C. CHESS                              
                                     ____________                                     
                                 Appeal No. 2000-0304                                 
                              Application No. 08/778,688                              
                                     ____________                                     
                                       ON BRIEF                                       
                                     ____________                                     
          Before NASE, CRAWFORD, and BAHR, Administrative Patent Judges.              
          CRAWFORD, Administrative Patent Judge.                                      



                                  DECISION ON APPEAL                                  
               This is a decision on appeal from the examiner's final                 
          rejection of claims 1 through 20, which are all of the claims               
          pending in this application.                                                
               The appellant's invention relates to an intermediate for               
          making repositionable or removable adhesive backed labels.  An              
          understanding of the invention can be derived from a reading                
          of exemplary claim 1, which appears in the appendix to the                  
          appellant's brief.                                                          






Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007