1 The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written
2 for publication in and is not binding precedent of the Board.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 PAUL JACOB ZIMMERMAN JR., DELAINE SUE BOWER
12 HAMPTON, KRISTIN LEIGH SHARP, JUNE IRENE HAHN, WILLIAM
13 HARRY ROCKLIN, ERIK DANIEL BARTHEL, TOD RANDALL TAYLOR,
14 ROBIN MATHEWS COX, RICHARD TERRENCE LYNCH, MICHAEL
14 WILLIAM FREELAND, SUSAN TERRY AZMIER, and CHRISTOPHER JOHN
15
16 HANNAFORD
17 ___________
18
19 Appeal 2007-1308
20 Application 10/097,398
21 Technology Center 3600
22 ___________
23
24 Decided: May 22, 2007
25 ___________
26
27 Before STUART S. LEVY, ROBERT E. NAPPI, and ANTON W. FETTING,
27 Administrative Patent Judges.
28
29 FETTING, Administrative Patent Judge.
30 DECISION ON APPEAL
31
32
33 STATEMENT OF CASE
34 This appeal from the Examiner’s rejection of claims 1-12, the only claims
35 pending in this application, arises under 35 U.S.C. § 134. We have jurisdiction
36 over the appeal pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 6(b) (2002).
37
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013