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for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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 DENNIS LEE MATTHIES, ROGER G. STEWART,
JAMES HAROLD ATHERTON, DENNIS J. BECHIS,
HEINZ H. BUSTA and ZILAN SHEN
____________
Appeal No. 2002-0328
Application No. 09/250,3241
____________
ON BRIEF
____________
Before JERRY SMITH, DIXON, and SAADAT, Administrative Patent
Judges.
SAADAT, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal from the Examiner’s final
rejection of claims 1-28, 33-35, 40, 43 and 44. Claims 30-32 and
37-39 have been allowed. The Examiner has objected to claims 29,
36, 41 and 42 and has indicated their allowability if rewritten
1 Application for patent filed February 16, 1999, which claims the
filing priority benefit under 35 U.S.C. § 119 of provisional Application No.
60/074,922, filed February 17, 1998.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007