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today was not written for publication and is not binding
precedent of the Board.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. 16
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_______________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_______________
Ex parte JOHN D. WHITMAN
and JEFF JOHNSON
______________
Appeal No. 2004-1863
Application 09/470,835
_______________
ON BRIEF
_______________
Before PAK, WARREN and OWENS, 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 appellants, in the brief and reply brief,
and based on our review, find that we cannot sustain the grounds of rejections advanced on
appeal: claims 17, 18 and 20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by
Ushijima; claims 19 and 21 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Ushijima; and claims 7, 8, 12 and 22 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Ushijima over either Akimoto or Lin et al (Lin).1,2
1 Claims 27 through 29 are also of record and “are now allowed” by the examiner (answer, page
2; see the final action mailed April 18, 2002 (Paper No. 7; pages 3-4). These claims along with
claims 7, 8, 12, 17 through 22 are all of the claims in the application. See the appendix to the
brief.
- 1 -
Page: 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007