Appeal No. 2004-1081
Application 10/041,836
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today was not written for publication and is not binding
precedent of the Board.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. 18
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_____________
Ex parte MARSHALL O. TOWNSEND II
_____________
Appeal No. 2004-1081
Application 10/041,836
_____________
ON BRIEF
_____________
Before WARREN, OWENS and JEFFREY T. SMITH, Administrative Patent Judges.
WARREN, Administrative Patent Judge.
Decision on Appeal and Opinion
We have carefully considered the record in this appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134, including the
opposing views of the examiner, in the answer, and appellant, in the brief and reply brief, and based on
our review, find that we cannot sustain the grounds of rejection advanced on appeal: claims 1, 11 through
13 and 20 stand rejected under 35 U.S .C . § 103 (a) as being unpatentable over Gibbs et al. (Gibbs) in
view of Manley; claims 4 through 6, 10 and 25 through 31 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Gibbs in view of Manley as applied to claims 1 and 20 above, and further in view
of Molinar; claim 9 stands rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Gibbs in view of Manley as applied to claims
1 and 20 above, and further in view of Beatty and Long; and claims 21 and 22 stand rejected
- 1 -
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007