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for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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 SHIGEKAZU ZEN
__________
Appeal No. 2007-0180
Application No. 10/663,843
__________
ON BRIEF
__________
Before SCHEINER, GREEN, and LEBOVITZ, Administrative Patent Judges.
LEBOVITZ, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This appeal involves claims to a pesticidal emulsifiable concentrate. The
Examiner has rejected the claims as obvious. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C.
§ 134. We affirm.
DISCUSSION
Claims 1 and 4-10, which are all the pending claims in the instant
application, are on appeal and stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Br. 4. The
patentability of the claims has been argued as a group. We select claim 1 as
representative of the claims for the purpose of deciding this appeal. See 37 C.F.R.
§ 41.37(c)(1)(vii).
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013