UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte CHRISTOPHER W. BURKHART and
LAWRENCE A. GOCHBERG
____________
Appeal 2007-0494
Application 10/447,446
Technology Center 1700
____________
Decided: October 31, 2007
____________
Before CHARLES F. WARREN, THOMAS A. WALTZ and
MICHAEL P. COLAIANNI, Administrative Patent Judges.
COLAIANNI, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON REQUEST FOR REHEARING
This is in response to a Request, filed May 21, 2007, for rehearing of
our decision, mailed March 28, 2007, wherein we sustained the § 102
rejection of claims 1-3, 9, and 12 as being anticipated by Senba.
Appellants contend that, contrary to the implication provided by
our language in the decision of “at least two gas ports” and “at least
four gas ports” (Decision 7 and 8), Senba does not disclose more than
two or four gas outlets (Request 3). On page 5 of the Request,
Appellants argue that “it is not reasonable to interpret . . . [the
Page: 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013