onecle

Ex Parte Wood et al - Page 1



                         The opinion in support of the decision being entered today is                             
                                       not binding precedent of the Board.                                         

                         UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                                                 
                                                 ____________                                                      
                               BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                                                  
                                           AND INTERFERENCES                                                       
                                                 ____________                                                      
                                        Ex parte MICHAEL D. WOOD,                                                  
                                   MARK L. LAFOREST, NEIL MURDIE,                                                  
                             DEAN S. KRISKOVICH, VERNON R. HUDALLA                                                 
                                     AND THADDEUS W. GONSOWSKI                                                     
                                                 ____________                                                      
                                               Appeal 2007-2175                                                    
                                            Application 10/315,464                                                 
                                            Technology Center 1700                                                 
                                                 ____________                                                      
                                           Decided: August 14, 2007                                                
                                                 ____________                                                      
                Before EDWARD C. KIMLIN, CHUNG K. PAK, and CATHERINE Q.                                            
                TIMM, Administrative Patent Judges.                                                                
                TIMM, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                                 


                                           DECISION ON APPEAL                                                      
                       This decision is in response to Appellants’ appeal under 35 U.S.C.                          
                 134(a).  This appeal involves claims 1, 2, and 4-16, the claims maintained                       
                under rejection by the Examiner in the Answer (Answer 6).1  Claim 37 has                           

                                                                                                                  
                1 References to the Answer are to the edited Answer mailed January 3, 2007.                        



Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013