Ex Parte Abbott 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                  today was not written for publication and is not                    
                          binding precedent of the Board.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. 17           

                      UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                       
                                                                                     
                         BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                           
                                  AND INTERFERENCES                                   
                                                                                     
                   Ex parte DONALD C. ABBOTT, MICHAEL E. MITCHELL,                    
                         PAUL R. MOEHLE and DOUGLAS W. ROMM                           
                                                                                     
                                Appeal No. 2004-1988                                  
                             Application No. 09/733,718                               
                                                                                     
                                      ON BRIEF                                        
                                                                                     
          Before KIMLIN, GARRIS and KRATZ, Administrative Patent Judges.              
          KIMLIN, Administrative Patent Judge.                                        

                                 DECISION ON APPEAL                                   
               This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims 1-6,              
          8-16 and 21-23.  Claims 7 and 24, the other claims remaining in             
          the present application, stand objected to by the examiner as               
          being dependent upon a rejected base claim.  Claim 1 is                     
          illustrative:                                                               
          1.   A leadframe for use in the assembly of integrated circuit              
               chips, comprising:                                                     

                                         -1-                                          



Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007