Ex Parte AYLWARD - 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                     publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 30         
                       UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                      
                                     ____________                                     
                          BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                          
                                   AND INTERFERENCES                                  
                                     ____________                                     
                              Ex parte J. RICHARD AYLWARD                             
                                     ____________                                     
                                 Appeal No. 2002-1689                                 
                              Application No. 08/796,285                              
                                     ____________                                     
                                 HEARD: MARCH 5, 2003                                 
                                     ____________                                     
          Before FLEMING, SAADAT, and LEVY, Administrative Patent Judges.             
          LEVY, Administrative Patent Judge.                                          



                                  DECISION ON APPEAL                                  
               This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the            
          examiner's final rejection of claims 30-321.                                


                                     BACKGROUND                                       
               Appellants' invention relates to surround sound channel                
          encoding and decoding.  An understanding of the invention can be            
          derived from a reading of exemplary claim 30, which is reproduced           
          as follows:                                                                 

               1 The rejection o claims 31 and 32 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) has been   
          withdrawn b the examiner.  Claims 31 and 32 have been indicated (answer, page
          5) as being objected to as dependent from a rejected base claim.            





Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007