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is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 29
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte EUGENIO GO VARONA, MONICA LYNN BONTRAGER,
JAIME BRAVERMAN, KUO-SHU EDWARD CHANG,
MICHAEL ALLEN DALEY, KAREN LYNN ENGLISH,
ARTHUR EDWARD GARAVAGLIA, HRISTO ANGELOV HRISTOV,
NANCY DONALDSON KOLLIN, TAMARA LEE MACE,
DAVID MICHAEL MATELA, SHARON RYMER,
REGINALD SMITH, ROLAND COLUMBUS SMITH, JR.
and MICHAEL DONALD SPERL
____________
Appeal No. 2003-1876
Application No. 09/209,044
____________
ON BRIEF
____________
Before PAK, JEFFREY T. SMITH and PAWLIKOWSKI, Administrative Patent Judges.
JEFFREY T. SMITH, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Appellants appeal the Examiner’s final rejection of claims 1-7 and 9-32, all of the
pending claims in the application.1 We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 134.
1 In rendering our decision, we have considered Appellants’ arguments presented in the Brief,
filed June 12, 2002 and the Reply Brief, filed October 24, 2002.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007