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for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 22
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte DEAN L. SICKING, JOHN DOUGLASS REID, RONALD KEITH
FALLER, BRIAN GEORGE PFEIFER, BARRY THOMAS ROSSON and JOHN
ROBERT ROHDE
____________
Appeal No. 2001-0291
Application No. 08/772,559
____________
ON BRIEF
____________
Before McQUADE, 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 1-17, which are all of the claims pending
in this application. Claim 14 was amended subsequent to the1
final rejection (see Paper Nos. 15 and 16).
We note that appellants filed a Terminal Disclaimer (Paper No. 11) in1
this application to overcome an obviousness type double patenting rejection
based on Application No. 08/583,307, filed January 5, 1996.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007