Appeal No. 2003-1176
Application No. 09/074,288
decision”).2
We have reconsidered our original decision in light of the
appellants’ arguments in the request. For the reasons stated
below, we are not persuaded that we misapprehended or overlooked
any point made in the appellants’ briefs3 to justify a different
outcome in this appeal. Accordingly, the appellants’ request
for a modification of our original decision is denied.
Background
Representative appealed claims 1 and 2 read as follows:
1. An integrated interior trim member for a
vehicle comprising:
a porous substrate;
an upholstery skin material, said upholstery skin
material being substantially coextensive with said
substrate; and
a molded foam material extending between said
upholstery skin material and said substrate, said
2 For reasons not entirely clear to us, the appellants’
request for rehearing was not received by the Board of Patent
Appeals and Interferences until of May 2, 2006. We note that
the electronic record of this application reveals that the
United States Patent and Trademark Office erroneously issued a
notice of abandonment on November 25, 2003. Upon learning of
the erroneous holding of abandonment through the “PAIR” system,
the appellants filed a petition under 37 CFR § 1.181 on June 18,
2004. In a decision mailed on November 30, 2005, the Director
of Technology Center 1700 granted the appellants’ petition to
withdraw the holding of abandonment.
3 See appeal brief filed on November 15, 2002 and reply
brief filed on April 1, 2003.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007