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written for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 26
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_____________
Ex parte KEVIN M. WORKMAN, STEVEN B. DOWNS, MIKEL J. FEATHERSTON,
and EARL N. WAUD
_____________
Appeal No. 2002-0748
Application No. 09/053,379
______________
ON BRIEF
_______________
Before HAIRSTON, BLANKENSHIP, and SAADAT, Administrative Patent
Judges.
HAIRSTON, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims
1 through 51. After the submission of the brief, the examiner
allowed claims 46 through 51, and objected to claims 9, 11
through 14, 29, 31 through 34 and 42 through 45 as being
dependent upon rejected base claims, but would be allowable if
rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of
the base claims and any intervening claims (answer, page 2).
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007