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written for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 32
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_______________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_______________
Ex Parte BRUCE P. MURCH, BRIAN J. ROSELLE
and KYLE D. JONES
_______________
Appeal No. 1998-0370
Application 08/568,410
_______________
HEARD: February 06, 2001
______________
Before, WARREN, WALTZ and JEFFREY T. SMITH, Administrative Patent Judges.
JEFFREY T. SMITH, Administrative Patent Judge.
Decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134
Applicants appeal the decision of the Primary Examiner rejecting claims 1-10,
which are all the claims in the application.1 We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 134.2
1 See Appeal Brief page 2. Contrary to Appellants’ assertion, claim 2 was not subject to the
final rejection. (See paper no. 22, mailed October 16, 1996). Accordingly, for purposes of this appeal
we review the Examiner’s rejection of claims 1 and 3-10.
2 The Examiner indicated in the Advisory action, paper no. 25, mailed February 6, 1997 that
the after final amendment, filed January 16, 1997, would be entered upon filing an appeal. We observe
-1-
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007