Ex parte BUSSEY, III et al. - 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          not written for publication and is not binding precedent of                 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. 27                
                      UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                       
                                     __________                                       
                         BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                           
                                  AND INTERFERENCES                                   
                                     __________                                       
                             Ex parte HARRY BUSSEY, III                               
                                and HARRY BUSSEY, JR.                                 
                                     __________                                       
                                Appeal No. 2001-1381                                  
                                Application 08/826,741                                
                                     ___________                                      
                                      ON BRIEF                                        
                                     ___________                                      
          Before STAAB, MCQUADE, and BAHR, Administrative Patent Judges.              
          MCQUADE, Administrative Patent Judge.                                       

                              ON REQUEST FOR REHEARING                                
               Pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.197(b), Harry Bussey, III et al.                
          request rehearing (i.e., reconsideration) of our decision on                
          appeal rendered September 20, 2001 to the extent that we                    
          sustained the examiner’s 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of                    
          independent claims 1 and 26 as being unpatentable over U.S.                 






                                          1                                           




Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007