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written for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 23
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_____________
Ex parte CHE-HOO NG,
EMI ISHIDA,
JAIME M. REYES,
JINNING LIU,
and
SANDEEP MEHTA
_____________
Appeal No. 2002-1169
Application No. 09/252,845
______________
ON BRIEF
_______________
Before HAIRSTON, FLEMING, and BLANKENSHIP, Administrative Patent
Judges.
HAIRSTON, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims
1 through 22. After submission of the brief, the examiner found
claim 14 to be allowable, but for its dependency from a rejected
base claim (answer, page 5). Accordingly, claims 1 through
13 and 15 through 22 remain before us on appeal.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007