Ex parte FRANKOWSKI et al. - Page 1




               The opinion in support of the decision being                           
               entered today was not written for publication                          
               in a law journal and is not binding precedent                          
               of the Board.                                                          
                                                               Paper No. 22           


                     UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                        
                                                                                     
                         BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                           
                                  AND INTERFERENCES                                   
                                                                                     
                     Ex parte DAVID FRANKOWSKI, NEIL J. ADAMS,                        
          STEVEN L. PLEE and DONALD J. REMBOSKI JR.                                   
                                                                                     
                                Appeal No. 1999-1621                                  
                             Application No. 08/035,348                               
                                                                                     
                                      ON BRIEF                                        
                                                                                     

          Before HAIRSTON, KRASS and BARRETT, Administrative Patent                   
          Judges.                                                                     
          KRASS, Administrative Patent Judge.                                         


                                 DECISION ON APPEAL                                   


               This is a decision on appeal from the final rejection of               
          claims 1, 14 and 27.  Claims 2-13, 15-26 and 28 have been                   
          indicated by the examiner as being directed to allowable                    

                                         -1–                                          





Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007