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was not written for publication and is not binding precedent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. 14
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte JOSEPH P. FALACE,
JOSEPH P. MANES,
and
DANIEL J. PLUTT
__________
Appeal No. 2000-1811
Application 08/879,638
__________
ON BRIEF
__________
Before BARRETT, RUGGIERO, and DIXON, Administrative Patent
Judges.
RUGGIERO, Administrative Patent Judge.
ON REQUEST FOR REHEARING
Appellants request that we reconsider that portion of our
decision of July 31, 2002 wherein we sustained the Examiner’s
35 U.S.C. § 102(b) rejection of claims 1, 2, 9, 10, 14, and 17
based on Semmlow, as well as the 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of
claims 3, 6, 7, 11, and 12 based on Semmlow alone, the 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) rejection of claim 13 based on Semmlow and Burke, and
1
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007