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today was not written for publication and is not binding
precedent of the Board.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 JOSEPH J. DAVIS, JR.
and JOHN J. H. FAARUP, SR.
______________
Appeal No. 2003-1638
Application 09/511,741
_______________
ON BRIEF
_______________
Before WARREN, TIMM and DELMENDO, Administrative Patent Judges.
WARREN, Administrative Patent Judge.
Decision on Appeal and Opinion
We have carefully considered the record in this appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134, including
the opposing views of the examiner, in the answer, and appellants, in the brief and reply brief,
and based on our review, find that we cannot sustain any of the grounds of rejection advanced on
appeal: claims 1, 2 and 17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Bowers et al. (Bowers) taken in view of Gallagher et al. (Gallagher); claim 3 stands rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Bowers taken in view of Hagen et al.
(Hagen); claims 6, 7 and 9 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Bowers taken in view of Hagen; and claim 11 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
- 1 -
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007