onecle

Ex Parte Curtin - 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                                   is not binding precedent of the Board                                    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 CAITLYN CURTIN                                              
                                             ______________                                                 
                                          Appeal No. 2007-3253                                              
                                          Application 10/733,414                                            
                                         Technology Center 3700                                             
                                            _______________                                                 
                                       Decided:  September 27, 2007                                         
                                            _______________                                                 
               Before CHARLES F. WARREN, THOMAS A. WALTZ, and                                               
               JEFFREY T. SMITH, Administrative Patent Judges.                                              
               WARREN, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                         

                                         DECISION ON APPEAL                                                 
                      Applicant appeals to the Board from the decision of the Primary                       
               Examiner finally rejecting claims 1 through 14 in the Office Action mailed                   
               June 20, 2005.  35 U.S.C.  6 and 134(a) (2002); 37 C.F.R.  41.31(a)                       
               (2005).                                                                                      
                      We reverse the decision of the Primary Examiner.                                      
                      Claim 1 illustrates Appellant’s invention of a dryer, and is                          
               representative of the claims on appeal:                                                      
                      1.  A dryer comprising:                                                               




Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013