onecle

Ex Parte Draaijer - Page 1



                 The opinion in support of the decision being entered today is not binding                
                                         precedent of the Board.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 ARIE DRAAIJER                                             
                                             ____________                                                 
                                           Appeal 2007-0615                                               
                                         Application 10/204,304                                           
                                        Technology Center 1700                                            
                                             ____________                                                 
                                          Decided: July 3, 2007                                           
                                             ____________                                                 

               Before BRADLEY R. GARRIS, CHUNG K. PAK, and                                                
               THOMAS A. WALTZ, Administrative Patent Judges.                                             
               GARRIS, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                       

                                        DECISION ON APPEAL                                                
                     This appeal involves claims 1 and 2.  We have jurisdiction over the                  
               appeal pursuant to 35 U.S.C.  6 and 134.                                                 
                     We AFFIRM.                                                                           








Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013