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for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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 KEVIN P. BAKER, MAUREEN BERESINI,
LAURA DeFORGE, LUC DESNOYERS, ELLEN FILVAROFF,
WEI-QUIANG GAO, MARY E. GERRITSEN, AUDREY GODDARD,
PAUL J. GODOWSKI, AUSTIN L. GURNEY, STEVEN SHERWOOD,
VICTORIA SMITH, TIMOTHY A. STEWART, DANIEL TUMAS,
COLIN K. WATANABE, WILLIAM I. WOOD, and ZEMIN ZHANG
_______________
Appeal No. 2006-1224
Application 10/145,877
_______________
ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL
_______________
Before FLEMING, Chief Administrative Patent Judge,
HARKCOM, Vice Chief Administrative Patent Judge, and
GRIMES, Administrative Patent Judge.
Per curiam.
On May 26, 2006, counsel for the appellants filed, among other documents, a
Request for Continued Examination (RCE) under 37 CFR § 1.114. Pursuant to the
notice entitled “Request for Continued Examination Practice and Changes to Provisional
Application Practice,” 65 Fed. Reg. 50092, 50095 (Aug. 16, 2000), and the provisions of
37 CFR § 1.114(d), a request for continued examination under 37 CFR § 1.114 filed
after appeal has been taken, but prior to a decision on the appeal, “will be treated as a
Page: 1 2 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007