Ex Parte DISCHLER - Page 1



          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          not written for publication and is not binding precedent of the             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. 17              
                      UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                       
                                     __________                                       
                         BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                           
                                  AND INTERFERENCES                                   
                                     __________                                       
                              Ex parte LOUIS DISCHLER                                 
                            ___________                                               
                                Appeal No. 2001-0140                                  
                             Application No. 09/356,916                               
                                     __________                                       
                                      ON BRIEF                                        
                                      _________                                       
          Before COHEN, STAAB, and CRAWFORD, Administrative Patent Judges.            
          CRAWFORD, Administrative Patent Judge.                                      

                                 DECISION ON APPEAL                                   
               This is a decision on appeal from the examiner’s final                 
          rejection of claims 1 through 9 and claims 17 through 20, which             
          are all the claims pending in the application.  Claims 10 through           
          16 have been canceled.                                                      
               The appellant’s invention is a dispenser system with at                
          least one binary dispensing array.  An understanding of the                 
          invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary claim 1,               
          which appears in the appendix to the appellant’s brief.                     






Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007