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today was not written for publication and is not binding
precedent of the Board.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 THOMAS E. HANSEN
and ROBERT PHILLIPS
______________
Appeal No. 2005-2131
Application 10/000,254
_______________
HEARD: October 19, 2005
_______________
Before GARRIS, WARREN and WALTZ, Administrative Patent Judges.
WARREN, Administrative Patent Judge.
Decision on Appeal
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the decision of the examiner finally
rejecting claims 1 through 4, 6 through 10 and 18 through 20. Claims 11 through 17 are also of
record and have been withdrawn from consideration by the examiner under 37 CFR § 1.142(b).1
Claims 1, 6 and 18 illustrate appellants’ invention of a method of and an apparatus for
1 Appellants state that “[n]o Amendment was filed after Final Rejection under 37 CFR 1.116. A
Request for Reconsideration was filed on June 30, 2004 and received by the United States Patent
and Trademark Office on July 2, 2004. The Request was considered but no claims allowed”
(brief, page 6). The examiner states that “[t]he amendment after final filed on June 30, 2004 has
been entered” (answer, page 2). The official electronic records of the USPTO show that the
amendment filed July 2, 2004, in fact did amend claims 1, 6 and 20, which amendments are
reflected in the appendix to the brief. Claims 11 through 17 remain of record (see the amendment
of July 2, 2004 (page 7)).
- 1 -
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007