Ex Parte Benda 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          was not written for publication and is not binding precedent                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.                                                               

                      UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                       
                                     __________                                       
                         BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                           
                                  AND INTERFERENCES                                   
                                     __________                                       
                             Ex parte JOHN A. BENDA and                               
                                  ARISTOTLE PARASCO                                   
                                     __________                                       
                                Appeal No. 2005-0783                                  
                               Application 10/039,094                                 
                                     __________                                       
                                        BRIEF                                         
                                     __________                                       
          Before CAROFF, KIMLIN, and DELMENDO, Administrative Patent                  
          Judges.                                                                     
          CAROFF, Administrative Patent Judge.                                        


                                  DECISION ON APPEAL                                  
               This is a decision on appeal from the examiner’s final                 
          rejection of claims 1-10 and 21-30.  Subsequent to the final                
          rejection, the examiner withdrew his rejection as to claims 21-22           
          in an advisory action mailed April 13, 2004.1  Accordingly, the             

               1 Claims 21-22 were rejected solely under 35 U.S.C. § 112,             
                                                                  (continued...)      
                                          1                                           




Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007