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for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 37
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte W. KEITH THORNTON
____________
Appeal No. 2000-1998
Application No. 08/828,523
____________
ON BRIEF
____________
Before McKELVEY, SCHAFER and BAHR, Administrative Patent Judges.
BAHR, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal from the examiner's final
rejection of claims 28-38 and 47-531. Claims 45 and 46, also
pending in this application, were not rejected in the examiner’s
final rejection (Paper No. 26). However, in the answer (Paper
No. 32, page 3), the examiner indicated that claims 28-34, 36-30
[sic, 36-38], 45 and 47 stand rejected. We interpret the
statement of the rejection on page 3 of the answer to mean that
claims 28-34, 36-38 and 47 remain rejected as in the final
1 Although both the final rejection and answer indicated that claim 1 is
rejected, claim 1 was canceled in an amendment filed December 22, 1994 (Paper
No. 2½ in parent Application No. 08/363,639, of which the instant application
is a file wrapper continuation) and, thus, is not before us on appeal.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007