Ex Parte Fichtner 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                               for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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 SIEGFRIED FICHTNER, JURGEN HOFMANN,                                    
                                KARL MUSSIG, and DANIEL VERHOEVEN                                             
                                                 ____________                                                 
                                              Appeal No. 2006-2534                                            
                                            Application No. 10/789,411                                        
                                                 ____________                                                 
                                           HEARD: JANUARY 9, 2007                                             
                                                 ____________                                                 
            Before RUGGIERO, SAADAT, and HOMERE, Administrative Patent Judges.                                
            SAADAT, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                              


                                             DECISION ON APPEAL                                               
                   This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C.  134(a) from the Examiner’s final rejection  
            of claims 1 and 15.  Claims 4-13 have been allowed and claims 2, 3 and 14 have been objected to   
            by the Examiner as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but indicated as allowable if      
            rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of their base claim.               
                   We affirm.                                                                                 









Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013