Ex Parte DONNER et al - 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                   for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 24         

                      UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                       
                                     ____________                                     
                          BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                          
                                   AND INTERFERENCES                                  
                                     ____________                                     
                  Ex parte DARYLE PAT DONNER, HAROLD WAINE FRIESEN,                   
                      DAVID R. HAWKINS, and STEPHEN TAYLOR ZERBS                      
                                     ____________                                     
                                 Appeal No. 2001-0382                                 
                              Application No. 08/861,481                              
                                     ____________                                     
                                       ON BRIEF                                       
                                     ____________                                     
          Before BARRETT, FLEMING, and RUGGIERO, Administrative Patent                
          Judges.                                                                     
          RUGGIERO, Administrative Patent Judge.                                      


                                   DECISION ON APPEAL                                 
               This is a decision on the appeal from the final rejection of           
          claims 1-14 and 24, which are all of the claims pending in the              
          present application.  Claims 15-23 have been canceled.  An                  
          amendment after final rejection filed June 4, 1999, and resubmitted         
          on August 5, 1999, was denied entry by the Examiner.                        
               The claimed invention relates to a cable having at least two           
          conductor pairs in which each conductor pair includes two                   
          individual insulated metallic conductors twisted together to define         






Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007