1 The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written
2 for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.
3
4 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
5 ____________
6
7 BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
8 AND INTERFERENCES
9 ____________
10
11 Ex parte SCOTT DAVID PAUL, MARK EDGAR MONTGOMERY, and
12 MARK STEVEN JOHNSON
13 ____________
14
15 Appeal No. 2006-1479
16 Application No. 10/324,660
17 Technology Center 3600
18 ____________
19 Decided: March 12, 2007
20 ____________
21
22 Before ANITA PELLMAN GROSS, JENNIFER D. BAHR, and
23 STUART S. LEVY, Administrative Patent Judges.
24
25 BAHR, Administrative Patent Judge.
26
27
28 DECISION ON APPEAL
29
30 STATEMENT OF THE CASE
31 Scott David Paul et al. (Appellants) appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134
32 from the Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1, 3-11, and 13-21, all the
33 claims pending in the application. We have jurisdiction over this appeal
34 under 35 U.S.C. § 6.
35 We AFFIRM.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013