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for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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 ALAN CUTHBERTSON, BARD INDREVOLL,
MAGNE SOLBAKKEN, TORGRIM ENGELL, MILL COLIN ARCHER,
and HARRY JOHN WADSWORTH
__________
Appeal 2007-1140
Application 10/753,729
Technology Center 1600
__________
ON BRIEF
__________
Before MILLS, GREEN, and LEBOVITZ, Administrative Patent Judges.
LEBOVITZ, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Claims 1-11, 13-18, 20, and 22 are on appeal. We have jurisdiction
under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We affirm the rejection under § 103, but because
our reasoning differs from the Examiner, we designate it as a new ground of
rejection. We vacate the obvious-type double-patenting rejection and
remand to the Examiner for further consideration.
STATEMENT OF CASE
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013