THIS OPINION WAS NOT WRITTEN FOR PUBLICATION
The opinion in support of the decision entered today (1) was not written for
publication in a law journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.
Paper No. 21
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________________
Ex parte MATTHEW N. PAPAKIPOS,
CARROLL PHILIP GOSSETT,
CHRISTIAN PAPPAS, HENRY P. MORETON,
and ROBERT J. WILLIAMSON
Appeal No. 2002-1491
Application 08/845,5261
ON BRIEF
Before LEE, LANE and MEDLEY, Administrative Patent Judges.
LEE, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the examiner’s rejection of
appellant’s claims 1, 2, 6-9, 12-16 and 18-25. No claim has been allowed. Claims 3-5, 10, 11
and 17 have been cancelled.
References relied on by the Examiner
Oha 5,202,670 April 13, 1993
Luken, Jr. (“Luken”) 5,278,948 January 11, 1994
1 Application for patent filed April 25, 1997.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007