Ex Parte CUOMO et al - Page 1




               The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 27              
                          UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                                                     
                                                     ____________                                                       
                                BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                                                      
                                              AND INTERFERENCES                                                         
                                                     ____________                                                       
                  Ex parte GENNARO A. CUOMO, BINH Q. NGUYEN, and RICHARD J. REDPATH                                     
                                                     ____________                                                       
                                                 Appeal No. 2003-0509                                                   
                                               Application No. 08/657,510                                               
                                                     ____________                                                       
                                                       ON BRIEF                                                         
                                                     ____________                                                       
              Before RUGGIERO, GROSS, and BARRY, Administrative Patent Judges.                                          
              BARRY, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                                       


                                                DECISION ON APPEAL                                                      
                     A patent examiner rejected claims 1-5, 7, 8, and 10-19.  The appellants appeal                     
              therefrom under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a).1 We affirm-in-part.                                                   
                                                   BACKGROUND                                                           
                     The invention at issue on appeal is a visual programming environment for                           
              developing a computer software application.  (Spec. at 32.)  According to the appellants,                 
              the "difficulty of use associated with . . . software" has been a drawback for developers                 


                     1The appellants also attempt to appeal the examiner's objection to claim 6.                        
              (Appeal Br. at 2.)  Rather than by appeal to the Board of Patent Appeals and                              
              Interferences ("Board"), however, such an issue is to be settled by petition to the                       
              Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO").  See In re Hengehold, 440                     
              F.2d 1395, 1403, 169 USPQ 473, 479 (CCPA 1971).                                                           





Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007