THIS OPINION WAS NOT WRITTEN FOR PUBLICATION
The opinion in support of the decision 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publication in a law journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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 WOLFGANG GUNZEL and PETER BACHMAN
__________________
Appeal No. 2000-0979
Application 08/767,7341
________________
ON BRIEF
________________
Before LEE, GARDNER-LANE and MEDLEY, Administrative Patent
Judges.
MEDLEY, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from
the examiner’s final rejection of claims 1-5, 8, 11 and 14-17.
A. Findings of Fact
1. The appellants state that the real party in interest
is U.S. Philips Corporation. (Brief at 1).
2. The application on appeal contains claims 1-17.
3. The examiner has indicated that claims 6, 7, 9, 10,
1
Application for patent filed December 16, 1996.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007