1 The opinion in support of the decision being entered
2 today is not binding precedent of the Board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 FORREST F. WING, JOHN J. PINK, ERIC S. SVENBY,
12 MICHAEL J. EVELAND, TODD E. KNIFFEN, RAVI K. SAWHNEY,
13 TIMOTHY MARK NUGENT, and JOHN FRANK ZINNI
14 ____________________
15
16 Appeal 2006-3342
17 Application 10/195,217
18 Technology Center 3600
19 ____________________
20
21 Decided: September 26, 2007
22 ____________________
23
24 Before: TERRY J. OWENS, MURRIEL E. CRAWFORD, and LINDA E.
25 HORNER, Administrative Patent Judges.
26
27 CRAWFORD, Administrative Patent Judge.
28
29
30 DECISION ON APPEAL
31
32 STATEMENT OF CASE
33 Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 (2002) from a rejection of
34 claims 1-8, 10-17, and 19-23. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b)
35 (2002).
36 Appellants invented a shelf (Specification 1).
37 Claim 1 under appeal reads as follows:
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013