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for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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 CHERYL D. BLUME, and ANTHONY R. DISANTO
__________
Appeal 2007-1080
Application 10/790,658
Technology Center 1600
__________
ON BRIEF
__________
Before MILLS, GREEN, and LEBOVITZ, Administrative Patent Judges.
LEBOVITZ, Administrative Patent Judge.
VACATUR AND REMAND
Claims 26 and 34-62 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first
paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement (Br. 8).
Claims 26 and 34-62 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious
over Borbe in view of Barton and Balsa (id.).
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013