The opinion in support of the decision being
entered today is not binding precedent of the board
Paper 19
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
___________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte FABRIZIO SAMARITANI and PATRIZIA NATALE
____________
Appeal 2001-1738
Application 08/913,7481
____________
Before: WILLIAM F. SMITH, Administrative Patent Judge, and
McKELVEY, Senior Administrative Patent Judge, and
MOORE, Administrative Patent Judge.
McKELVEY, Senior Administrative Patent Judge.
Decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134
The appeal is from a decision of a primary examiner
rejecting claims 1-16. We affirm, but designate our affirmance
as a new ground of rejection under 37 CFR § 1.196(b).
A. Findings of fact
The record supports the following findings by at least a
preponderance of the evidence.2
Application for patent filed 21 November 1997. Applicants claim
priority based on PCT application PCT/EP95/01055, filed 21 March 1995. The
real party in interest is Applied Research Systems ARS Holding N.V. (Appeal
Brief, page 1).
To the extent these findings of fact discuss legal issues, they may be
treated as conclusions of law.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007