THIS OPINION WAS NOT WRITTEN FOR PUBLICATION
The opinion in support of the decision entered today (1) was not written for
publication in a law journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________________
Ex parte JOSEPH ZELIKOVITZ
Appeal No. 2006-0697
Reexamination Control No. 90/006,402
Patent No. 5,555,4781
HEARD March 20, 2006
Before LEE, HANLON and LANE, Administrative Patent Judges.
LEE, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 and § 306 from the
examiner’s rejection of the patentee’s claims 1-20 in the patent reexamination
proceeding.
References relied on by the Examiner
Chan et al. (Chan) 5,351,146 September 27, 1994
Smith et al. (Smith) 5,559,625 September 24, 1996
Bales 5,386,466 January 31, 1995
1 Issued September 10, 1996, and based on application filed June 7, 1995. Request for
reexamination filed October 4, 2002. The real party in interest is Red River Optic Corporation, Inc.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007