Ex Parte PAFF - 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                     publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 31         
                       UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                      
                                     ____________                                     
                          BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                          
                                  AND INTERFERENCES                                   
                                     ____________                                     
                                 Ex parte ROBERT PAFF                                 
                                     ____________                                     
                                 Appeal No. 1998-0872                                 
                              Application No. 08/438,479                              
                                     ____________                                     
                                       ON BRIEF                                       
                                     ____________                                     
          Before JERRY SMITH, BARRY, and LEVY, Administrative Patent Judges.          
          LEVY, Administrative Patent Judge.                                          



                                  DECISION ON APPEAL                                  
               This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the            
          examiner's final rejection of claims 98-100, 102-107 and 109-130,           
          which are all of the claims pending in this application.                    


                                     BACKGROUND                                       
               Appellant's invention relates to a graphical workstation for           
          an integrated security system.  An understanding of the invention           
          can be derived from a reading of exemplary claim 98, which is               
          reproduced as follows:                                                      






Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007