Ex Parte Beeler - 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               written for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 16           
                      UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                       
                                    ____________                                      
                         BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                           
                                  AND INTERFERENCES                                   
                                    ____________                                      
                               Ex parte ROSCOE BEELER                                 
                                    ____________                                      
                                Appeal No. 2002-1968                                  
                             Application No. 09/574,922                               
                                    ____________                                      
                                      ON BRIEF                                        
                                    ____________                                      
          Before FRANKFORT, STAAB, and NASE, Administrative Patent Judges.            
          FRANKFORT, Administrative Patent Judge.                                     



                                 DECISION ON APPEAL                                   

          This is a decision on appeal from the examiner's refusal to                 
          allow claim 45, which was substituted for finally rejected claims           
          15 through 32, 35 and 36 in a paper filed January 29, 2002 by FAX           
          (note the examiner's answer, page 2).  Claims 1 through 38 have             
          been canceled.  Claims 39 through 44 submitted in an amendment              
          after final (Paper No. 6), were refused entry by the examiner               
          (See advisory action, Paper No. 7).                                         









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

Last modified: November 3, 2007