Ex Parte Kumar 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                         for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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 KANTA KUMAR and                                               
                                        CHESTER A. BACON, JR.                                                
                                               ____________                                                  
                                             Appeal 2006-3344                                                
                                           Application 10/202,150                                            
                                          Technology Center 1700                                             
                                               ____________                                                  
                                           Decided: April 5, 2007                                            
                                               ____________                                                  

                Before THOMAS A. WALTZ, PETER F. KRATZ, and                                                  
                JEFFREY T. SMITH, Administrative Patent Judges.                                              
                SMITH, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                          

                              ORDER REMANDING TO THE EXAMINER                                                
                      This appeal involves claims 1, 3-6, 9, 11-19, and 23.  We remand the                   
                application to the jurisdiction of the Examiner for consideration and                        
                explanation of issues raised by the record.  37 C.F.R. §§ 41.35(b) and                       
                41.50(a)(1) (2006).                                                                          






Page:  1  2  3  4  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013