Ex Parte Fairley 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                              for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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 PETER FAIRLEY, NEIL S. SHAW, and DAVID C. STEER                              
                                                ____________                                                  
                                             Appeal No. 2006-2731                                             
                                          Application No. 10/102,077                                          
                                                ____________                                                  
                                                  ON BRIEF                                                    
                                                ____________                                                  

                Before SCHEINER, GRIMES, and LINCK,  Administrative Patent Judges.                            
                LINCK, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                           

                                           DECISION ON APPEAL                                                 
                      This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C.  134 from the final rejection of all      
                of the pending claims in Application No. 10/102,077, filed March 20, 2002 and claiming        
                a priority date of March 21, 2001.1                                                           
                Claims on Appeal                                                                              
                      Claims 1-3, 6-10, and 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.  103(a).  Only                
                dependent claims 2 and 15 have been argued separately.   Thus, we consider claims 1, 2,       
                and 15.  The remaining claims stand or fall with claims 1 and 2.                              

                                                                                                             
                1 The real party in interest is Unilever-Home & Personal Care USA, Division of Conopco.       




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

Last modified: September 9, 2013