Ex Parte MAGERLEIN 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            written for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 21              


                      UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                       
                                    _____________                                     
                         BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                           
                                  AND INTERFERENCES                                   
                                    _____________                                     
                 Ex parte JOHN HAROLD MAGERLEIN and ALBERT E. RUEHLI                  
                                    _____________                                     
                                Appeal No. 2001-1444                                  
                             Application No. 08/994,706                               
                                   ______________                                     
                                      ON BRIEF                                        
                                   _______________                                    

          Before THOMAS, RUGGIERO, and BLANKENSHIP, Administrative Patent             
          Judges.                                                                     
          RUGGIERO, Administrative Patent Judge.                                      


                                 DECISION ON APPEAL                                   
               This is a decision on the appeal from the final rejection of           
          claims 18-23.  Claims 1-17 were canceled earlier in the                     
          prosecution.  An amendment filed January 25, 2001 after final               
          rejection, which canceled claim 21, was approved for entry by the           
          Examiner.  Accordingly, only the Examiner’s rejection of claims             
          18-20, 22, and 23 is before us on appeal.                                   








Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007