Ex Parte Kapur 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                             for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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 AJAY KAPUR, JEFFREY WAYNE EBERHARD,                                         
                      BORIS YAMRON, KAI E. THOMENIUS, DONALD JOSEPH                                         
                  BUCKLEY, JR., ROGER NEAL JOHNSON, REINHOLD F. WIRTH,                                      
                 OLIVER ASTLEY, BEALE OPSAHL-ONG, SERGE LOUIS WILFRID                                       
                                      MULLER, and STEVE CARR                                                
                                            Appeal 2007-1926                                                
                                          Application 10/062,334                                            
                                         Technology Center 3700                                             
                                         DECIDED: June 15, 2007                                             
               Before TONI R. SCHEINER, LORA M. GREEN, and RICHARD M.                                       
               LEBOVITZ, Administrative Patent Judges.                                                      
               LEBOVITZ, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                       

                                         DECISION ON APPEAL                                                 
                      This is a decision on appeal from the final rejection of claims 1-10                  
               and 12-20.  We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C.  6(b).  We affirm.                         

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

Last modified: September 9, 2013