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for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 27
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte JEAN-MARC GUIBAUD and JEAN-PIERRE RIGAL
____________
Appeal No. 1999-2033
Application No. 08/737,928
____________
HEARD: FEBRUARY 19, 2002
____________
Before STAAB, McQUADE and BAHR, Administrative Patent Judges.
BAHR, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal from the examiner's final rejection (Paper No. 7) of
claims 12-31. Claims 12-14, 17, 18, 26, 28 and 30 were amended after the final rejection
(see Paper No. 9). As a result of this amendment, in an advisory action mailed June 26,
1998 (Paper No. 10), the examiner subsequently indicated that claims 14, 16, 18 and 20
are allowable. The answer (Paper No. 15) is replete with inconsistencies as to which
claims stand allowed and which claims stand rejected. For example, the answer does not
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007