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publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 31
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_____________
Ex parte KURT P. WACHTLER,
DAVID N. WALTER,
and
LARRY J. MOWATT
_____________
Appeal No. 1998-0152
Application No. 07/966,645
______________
ON BRIEF
_______________
Before THOMAS, KRASS, and GROSS, Administrative Patent Judges.
KRASS, Administrative Patent Judge.
ON REQUEST FOR REHEARING
Appellants request that we reconsider that part of our
decision of September 30, 2000 wherein we sustained the
rejection of claims 26-42, 44, 46-54, 56, 57 and 59-63.
Appellants first argue that Eichelberger “has nothing
whatsoever to do with optical interconnects or the
transmission or reception of optical energy in any form.”
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007