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publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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 JOHANNES HENDRIKUS MARIA SPRUIT, JOHAN CORNELIS TALSTRA,
ROBERT ALBERTUS BRONDIJK and RONALD REINDERT DRENTEN
____________
Appeal No. 2004-0779
Application No. 09/790,185
____________
ON BRIEF
____________
Before HAIRSTON, DIXON, and LEVY, Administrative Patent Judges.
LEVY, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the
examiner's final rejection1 of claims 1-72, which are all of the
claims pending in this application.
1 The examiner (answer, page 2) indicates that the rejections identified
by appellants as issue numbers 3-6, 8 and 11 (brief, pages 4 and 5) are moot
as these rejections have been withdrawn.
2 In an amendment (Paper No. 10, filed October 15, 2002) filed
subsequent to the final rejection (Paper No. 9, mailed August 22, 2002),
appellants canceled claim 6. The amendment was entered by the examiner (Paper
No. 11, mailed October 22, 2002).
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007