Ex Parte WILSON 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          written for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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 RICHARD C. WILSON                                
                                           and                                          
                                  PATRICK M. CULPEPPER                                  
                                      __________                                        
                                 Appeal No. 2006-0812                                   
                              Application No. 09/391,294                                
                                      ___________                                       
                                       ON BRIEF                                         
                                      ___________                                       
          Before BARRETT, MEDLEY, and MOORE, Administrative Patent Judges.              
          MOORE, Administrative Patent Judge.                                           
                                   DECISION ON APPEAL                                   
               This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the final                
          rejection of claims 1-2 and 4-5 of reissue application 09/391,294             
          of Patent 5,664,376 (08/639,698).  Claims 6-23 have been                      
          cancelled.  Claim 3 does not appear to be rejected, although it is            
          not indicated to be allowable.                                                
                                 REPRESENTATIVE CLAIMS                                  
               The appellants have indicated (Brief, page 3) that, for the              
          purposes of this appeal, claims 1-2 and 4 will stand or fall                  
          together.  Claim 5 is urged to stand separately.  Accordingly, we             
          reproduce independent claims 1 and 5 below:                                   





Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007