Ex Parte Svendenius et al - Page 1





        1            The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was                 
        2         not written for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.            
        3                                                                                           
        4                                                                                           
        5             UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                                     
        6                                 _____________                                             
        7                                                                                           
        8                  BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                                       
        9                             AND INTERFERENCES                                             
       10                                 _____________                                             
       11                                                                                           
       11 Ex parte JACOB SVENDENUIS, PETER NILSSON, and OLA NOCKHAMMAR                              
       12                                                                                           
       13                                 _____________                                             
       14                                                                                           
       15                              Appeal No. 2007-1454                                         
       16                            Application No. 11/088,528                                     
       17                             Technology Center 3600                                        
       18                                ______________                                             
       19                                                                                           
       20                             Decided: August 3, 2007                                       
       21                                _______________                                            
       22                                                                                           
       22 Before WILLIAM F. PATE, III, TERRY J. OWENS, and MURRIEL E.                               
       23                                                                                           
       23 CRAWFORD, Administrative Patent Judges.                                                   
       24                                                                                           
       25                                                                                           
       25 PATE, III, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                   
       26                                                                                           
       27                                                                                           
       28                                                                                           
       29                             DECISION ON APPEAL                                            
       30                                                                                           
       31                          STATEMENT OF THE CASE                                            
       32                                                                                           
       33        This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims 1-48.  These are the only     
       34  claims in the application.   We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C.  134 and 6(a).       







Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013