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not written for publication and is not binding
precedent of the Board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. 18
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_____________
Ex parte KOFI SCHULTERBRANDT,
RAFAEL ALEJANDRO SAMUELS
and WILLIAM M. PERKINS
______________
Appeal No. 2004-1641
Application 09/764,388
______________
ON BRIEF
_______________
Before FLEMING, JEFFREY T. SMITH, and PAWLIKOWSKI, Administrative
Patent Judges.
PAWLIKOWSKI, 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 1, 3, 5-8 and 20-25. A copy
of each of these claims is set forth in the attached Appendix.
Appellants group the claims as set forth on page 3 of the
brief. To the extent that any one claim is separately argued
with regard to patentability, we will consider such claim in this
appeal.
Claims 1, 3, 7, 8, and 24 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Kiyohara in view of Garland.
Claims 5, 6, 20-23, and 25 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Kiyohara in view of Garland and
further in view of Simpson.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007