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not binding precedent of the Board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. 15
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_______________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_______________
Ex parte JORG LAWRENZ-STOLZ
______________
Appeal No. 2001-1295
Application 09/283,169
______________
RECONSIDERATION
______________
Before THOMAS, BARRETT, and FLEMING, Administrative Patent Judges.
THOMAS, Administrative Patent Judge.
ON REQUEST FOR REHEARING
In a paper received on Janaury 16, 2003, appellant requests
that we rehear a decision dated November 25, 2002, in which we
sustained the rejection of all claims on appeal under 35 U.S.C.
103.
The major issue for our consideration in the appeal is se4t
forth in our earlier decision focused on the claimed feature of
each independent claim on appeal that the cyulindrical lens in
effect appears to be stated to be "independent of the holder"
otherwise recited in each of these claims. At the bottom of page
1 of the rfequest for Rehearing indicates that this limitation
was added at the beginning of the prosecution of this continuing
application and was considered important for distinguishing over
the art the examiner had applied.
1
Page: 1 2 3 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007