Ex parte KLEEWEIN et al. - Page 1




          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          not written for publication and is not binding precedent of                 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 JAMES C. KLEEWEIN,                              
                             EILEEN T. LIN and YUN WANG                               
                                     __________                                       
                                Appeal No. 1997-0587                                  
                               Application 08/314,644                                 
                                     ___________                                      
                                      ON BRIEF                                        
                                     ___________                                      
          Before JERRY SMITH, BARRY and LEVY, Administrative Patent                   
          Judges.                                                                     
          JERRY SMITH, Administrative Patent Judge.                                   

                                 DECISION ON APPEAL                                   
          This is a decision on the appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134                      
          from the examiner’s final rejection of claims 1-20.  Two                    
          amendments after appeal were filed by appellants, and both                  
          amendments were entered by the examiner.  The second amendment              
          cancelled claims 9 and 18.  Accordingly, this appeal is                     
          directed to the rejection of claims 1-8, 10-17, 19 and 20,                  

                                          1                                           





Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007