Ex Parte Roemmler - Page 1


                         The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written         
                               for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.                   
                      UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                                             
                                                __________                                                  
                           BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                                               
                                        AND INTERFERENCES                                                   
                                                __________                                                  
                              Ex parte MARK E. WILSON, RONNY L. MOSER,                                      
                      DONALD E. JR. ORR, DAVID D. HALL, and DOUGLAS M. WEBEL                                
                                                __________                                                  
                                           Appeal No.  2005-2267                                            
                                        Application No.  09/870,899                                         
                                                __________                                                  
                                                 ON BRIEF                                                   
                                                __________                                                  
               Before SCHEINER, ADAMS, and MILLS, Administrative Patent Judges.                             
               ADAMS, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                          

                                          DECISION ON APPEAL                                                
                      This is a decision on the appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the                       
               examiner’s final rejection of claims 1-6, 8, 9, 13-20, 23, 25, 41, and 71-102,               
               which are all the claims pending in the application.                                         
                      Claim 1 is illustrative of the subject matter on appeal and is reproduced             
               below:                                                                                       
                      1. A method of increasing the reproductive performance of a female                    
                         swine, comprising the step of administering to the female swine a feed             
                         composition comprising a marine animal product;                                    
                            wherein the marine animal product comprises C20 and C22 omega-3                 
                         fatty acids or esters thereof; and                                                 
                            wherein the feed composition as a final mixture comprises about                 
                         0.025% to about 2% by weight of the marine animal product.                         


                      The references relied upon by the examiner are:                                       





Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007