Ex Parte Dunshee 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                   for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 24         
                       UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                      
                                     ____________                                     
                          BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                          
                                   AND INTERFERENCES                                  
                                     ____________                                     
                     Ex parte WAYNE K. DUNSHEE and MARY LYNN BROWN                    
                                     ____________                                     
                                 Appeal No. 2004-1372                                 
                              Application No. 09/577,551                              
                                     ____________                                     
                                       ON BRIEF                                       
                                     ____________                                     
          Before GARRIS, PAK, and DELMENDO, Administrative Patent Judges.             
          PAK, Administrative Patent Judge.                                           

                                  DECISION ON APPEAL                                  
               This is a decision on an appeal from the examiner’s refusal to         
          allow claims 11 through 13, 16 through 33, 35 through 37, 39                
          through 45 and 49 through 52, which are all of the claims pending           
          in the above-identified application.  Subsequent to the final               
          Office action dated May 24, 2002, claims 11, 16, 25, 35, 37 and 39          
          were amended and claims 34 and 38 were canceled.  We have                   
          jurisdiction pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 6 and 134.                            






Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007