Ex Parte Dageville 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                          for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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 BENOIT DAGEVILLE and MOHAMED ZAIT                                           
                                               ____________                                                    
                                              Appeal 2007-1048                                                 
                                           Application 09/969,334                                              
                                          Technology Center 2100                                               
                                               ____________                                                    
                                           Decided: May 25, 2007                                               
                                               ____________                                                    

                Before KENNETH W. HAIRSTON, HOWARD B. BLANKENSHIP, and                                         
                MAHSHID D. SAADAT, Administrative Patent Judges.                                               

                BLANKENSHIP, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                      


                                          DECISION ON APPEAL                                                   
                      This appeal involves claims 23 and 31.  We have jurisdiction under 35                    
                U.S.C.  6(b), 134(a).                                                                        







Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013