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for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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 HENRI JACQUES SUERMONDT and
GEORGE HENRY FORMAN
____________
Appeal 2007-0455
Application 10/096,452
Technology Center 2100
____________
Decided: May 29, 2007
____________
Before JAMES D. THOMAS, KENNETH W. HAIRSTON, and JOSEPH F.
RUGGIERO, Administrative Patent Judges.
HAIRSTON, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the Final Rejection of
claims 1 to 10, 12 to 22, 24 to 28 and 33 to 40. We have jurisdiction under
35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
Appellants have invented a hierarchical visualization tool that has a
display that simultaneously shows a plurality of predictive features for a
Page: 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013