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written for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 26
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte JAMES A. DAVIS,
WILLIAM F. BARHAM, JR. And
GREGORY A. BRANDT
__________
Appeal No. 2002-0693
Application No. 09/073,686
___________
HEARD: FEBRUARY 11, 2003
___________
Before WALTZ, PAWLIKOWSKI and MOORE, Administrative Patent Judges.
MOORE, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the final
rejection of claims 1-7, 9-12, 14-16, 18-21, 23 and 24, which are
all of the claims pending in this application. Claims 8, 13, 17
and 22 have been cancelled.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAIM
Although the appellants have stated that claims 1-7, 9-12, 23
and 24 are separately patentable from claims 14-16 and 18-21, no
separate argument for any claim has been provided in the appeal
brief or the reply brief. Claims must be argued separately on
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007