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for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 16
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte ALEXANDER BALLY and ERIC R. COLBURN
____________
Appeal No. 2001-1198
Application No. 09/233,899
____________
ON BRIEF
____________
Before STAAB, NASE, and BAHR, Administrative Patent Judges.
NASE, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal from the examiner's final
rejection (Paper No. 6, mailed July 27, 2000) of claims 1 to
5, 7 to 15, 19 and 20. The other claims pending in this
application (i.e., claims 6, 16 to 18 and 21 to 33) are not
under rejection since the obviousness-type double patenting
rejection made in the final rejection was withdrawn by the
examiner in the Office letter of October 24, 2000 (Paper No.
11).
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007