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for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 33
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte WILLI DERKS, HANS-JURGEN REISMANN and EGON SIPPEL
____________
Appeal No. 2000-0590
Application No. 08/019,500
____________
ON BRIEF
____________
Before ABRAMS, FRANKFORT, and NASE, Administrative Patent Judges.
ABRAMS, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
1
This is a decision on appeal from the examiner's final rejection of claims 2, 4-11
and 13. Subsequently, claims 2, 4, 5, 7 and 13 were canceled, and claim 14 was added,
leaving claims 6, 8-11 and 14 before us on appeal.
We REVERSE.
1The Board rendered a previous decision in this application, wherein the
examiner’s rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103 were reversed and a new rejection under 35
U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, was entered (Paper No. 21, mailed Dec. 11, 1997).
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007