The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written for
publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.
Paper No. 23
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte ANDREAS WEIGL, BERND HERRMANN, ULRICH KOELLE,
HELMUT RANDOLL, and ROBERT HUGEL
____________
Appeal No. 2000-0341
Application No. 08/849,169
____________
HEARD: July 10, 2001
____________
Before KRASS, LALL, and BLANKENSHIP, Administrative Patent
Judges.
LALL, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from
the Examiner's final rejection of claims 3 and 4. Claims 1 to
2 and 5 to 10 have been indicated as allowed by the Examiner
per page 4 of the Examiner's answer.
The disclosed invention is directed to an anti-theft
system for motor vehicles. A blocking control device controls
the release or blocking of a motor vehicle device. The motor
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007