onecle

Ex Parte Shaouy et al - Page 1



                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                        for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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 WILLIAM PHILIP SHAOUY and                                      
                               MATTHEW BUNKLEY TREVATHAN                                              
                                           ____________                                               
                                          Appeal 2007-0987                                            
                                       Application 09/810,992                                         
                                      Technology Center 2100                                          
                                           ____________                                               
                                       Decided: May 24, 2007                                          
                                           ____________                                               

               Before LEE E. BARRETT, JOSEPH F. RUGGIERO, and                                         
               JEAN R. HOMERE, Administrative Patent Judges.                                          
               RUGGIERO, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                 


                                      DECISION ON APPEAL                                              
                                    STATEMENT OF THE CASE                                             
                    Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C.  134 from the Final Rejection of               
               claims 1-20.  We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C.  6(b).                             
                    Appellants’ disclosed invention relates to a method and apparatus for             
               tailoring information to the characteristics of a user of an application               




Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013