The opinion in support of the decision being entered today is not binding precedent of the Board.
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_______________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_______________
Ex parte HELMUT JERG, MICHAEL ROSENBAUER, and BERND SCHESSL
_______________
Appeal No. 2007-0358
Application 10/873,477
Technology Center 1700
_______________
Decided: March 12, 2007
_______________
Before GRON, DELMENDO, and MEDLEY, Administrative Patent Judges.
DELMENDO, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Statement of the Case
Applicants have appealed from a final rejection of claims 1-11 of United
States Patent Application 10/873,477 under 35 U.S.C. § 134 (2006).1 We have
jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
1 Applicants and the examiner submit that claims 5 and 10 also stand finally
rejected but are “not appealed.” (Amended Appeal Brief, filed June 5, 2006, at 5;
Examiner’s Answer mailed July 20, 2006 at 2.) We note, however, that “[a]n
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013