The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written
for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte DICK LEE KNOX
____________
Appeal No. 2005-0141
Application No. 09/656,683
____________
HEARD: FEBRUARY 23, 2005
____________
Before COHEN, NASE, and BAHR, Administrative Patent Judges.
COHEN, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims 1
through 14, all of the claims in the application. At the oral
hearing, James E. Bradley (counsel for appellant) requested that
the appeal be dismissed as to claims 12 through 14. The request
followed a discussion at the hearing of appellant’s grouping
together of claims 1 through 3, 5 through 9, and 11 through 13
(main brief, page 3). We pointed out that in selecting a claim
for review, we would consider selecting the broadest claim of the
grouping, i.e., independent claim 12 drawn to a bearing assembly
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007