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written for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 48
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_____________
Ex parte DIANE M. FOLEY,
EVERETT W. BENNETT,
SAM C. SLIFKIN, dec’d,
BY CAROLYN J. SLIFKIN
_____________
Appeal No. 1999-1005
Application No. 08/739,157
______________
ON BRIEF
_______________
Before KIMLIN, GARRIS, and WALTZ, Administrative Patent Judges.
GARRIS, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on an appeal from the refusal of the
examiner to allow claims 87, 88, 90-92, 94-102, 108, 109 and
116 as amended subsequent to the final rejection.1 These are all
of the claims remaining in the application.
1We observe that the amendment filed March 5, 1998 after the
final rejection has not been physically entered despite the examiner’s
entry-authorization in the advisory action mailed March 19, 1998.
This oversight should be rectified upon return of the application to
the jurisdiction of the Examining Corps.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007