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not written for publication and is not binding precedent of the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. 26
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
______________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_______________
Ex parte STEPHEN MICHAEL REUNING
_______________
Appeal No. 2004-1714
Application No. 09/897,826
_______________
ON BRIEF
_______________
Before HAIRSTON, KRASS, and NAPPI, Administrative Patent Judges.
HAIRSTON, Administrative Patent Judge.
ORDER TO VACATE DECISION
AND
ORDER TO DISMISS APPEAL
In a decision dated September 30, 2004, the Board affirmed
the 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) rejection of claims 1 through 19 based
upon the teachings of the patent to McGovern. In response to a
October 21, 2005 request for rehearing, the Board informed
appellant on November 30, 2005 that the request for rehearing had
been granted to the extent that our decision had been
reconsidered, but that such request was denied with respect to
making any modifications to the decision. Prior to the November
30, 2005 mailing date of our response to the request for
Page: 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007