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not written for publication and is not binding precedent of the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 RICHARD K. WILLIAMS and WAYNE B. GRABOWSKI
__________
Appeal No. 2003-2169
Application 09/792,667
___________
ON BRIEF
___________
Before OWENS, KRATZ and TIMM, Administrative Patent Judges.
OWENS, Administrative Patent Judge.
ON REQUEST FOR REHEARING
The appellants request reconsideration of our decision
mailed January 5, 2004 wherein we affirmed the rejection of
claims 1-3 over the combination of Kakumoto and Agahi.
The appellants argue that the board did not refute the
appellants’ argument in the reply brief (page 2) that “nowhere do
Agahi et al. teach or suggest how the ‘dircctional’[sic] nature
of the deposition is obtained”, but, rather, stated, in essence,
that the appellants also have not disclosed how to obtain the
1
Page: 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007