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publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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 LEO YUAN
and
CHRISTOPHER CHENG
_____________
Appeal No. 1999-2568
Application No. 08/640,096
______________
ON BRIEF
_______________
Before HAIRSTON, GROSS, and BLANKENSHIP, Administrative Patent
Judges.
HAIRSTON, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims 1
through 10. In an Amendment After Final (paper number 11), 1
1The amendment is set forth in the body of the reply
brief. According to the examiner (supplemental answer, page
1), the amendment had the effect of overcoming the
indefiniteness rejection of claim 7. The same holds true for
the indefiniteness rejection of dependent claims 8 through 10.
(continued...)
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007