1 The opinion in support of the decision being entered today is not binding
2 precedent of the Board
3
4 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
5 ____________________
6
7 BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
8 AND INTERFERENCES
9 ____________________
10
11 Ex parte RODGER WILLIAMS and KENNETH H. GENTRY, JR.
12 ____________________
13
14 Appeal 2007-0764
15 Application 09/840,469
16 Technology Center 3600
17 ____________________
18
19 Decided: July 26, 2007
20 ____________________
21
22 Before: TERRY J. OWENS, MURRIEL E. CRAWFORD and HUBERT C.
23 LORIN, Administrative Patent Judges.
24
25 CRAWFORD, Administrative Patent Judge.
26
27
28 DECISION ON APPEAL
29
30 STATEMENT OF CASE
31 Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 (2002) from a final rejection
32 of claims 1, 4 to 9, 11 to 21, and 28 to 33. Claims 2 and 3 have been
33 withdrawn from consideration and claims 10 and 22 to 27 have been
34 canceled. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b) (2002).
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013