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for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 17
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte GREGORY W. GALE
____________
Appeal No. 2001-1462
Application No. 09/306,516
____________
ON BRIEF
____________
Before ABRAMS, 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 7-14. Claims 1-6, the only other claims
pending in this application, stand allowed. As claim 8 stands
rejected only under the doctrine of obviousness-type double
patenting, the examiner having withdrawn the rejection of claim 8
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 on page 2 of the answer, and appellant has
not appealed the obviousness-type double patenting rejection, as
explained infra, claim 8 is not involved in this appeal.
Accordingly, this appeal involves only claims 7 and 9-14.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007