Ex Parte Kramer - 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                   for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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 FELIX KRAMER                                                
                                     ____________                                                     
                                 Appeal No. 2006-1343                                                 
                              Application No. 10/121,530                                              
                                     ____________                                                     
                                  HEARD: JUNE 8, 2006                                                 
                                     ____________                                                     

          Before FRANKFORT, BAHR and NAPPI, Administrative Patent Judges.                             
          FRANKFORT, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                     

                                  DECISION ON APPEAL                                                  

          This is a decision on appeal from the examiner's final                                      
          rejection of claims 1, 6 through 8, 16 and 17.  Claims 9 through                            
          15, the only other claims remaining in the application, have been                           
          indicated to contain allowable subject matter, but currently stand                          
          objected to as being dependent upon a rejected parent claim.                                
          Claims 2 through 5 have been cancelled.                                                     
















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

Last modified: November 3, 2007