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for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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 GARY L. SCHROEDER,
TAIYE PHILIPS ORIARAN, EDWARD J. YOCK,
BRADLEY G. SCHMIDT, MICHAEL E. HUSS and
HENRY S. OSTROWSKI
____________
Appeal 2006-2400
Application 10/051,814
Technology Center 1700
____________
Decided: December 1, 2006
____________
Before KIMLIN, PAK, and WARREN, Administrative Patent Judges.
PAK, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal from the Examiner's final rejection of claims 24
through 33. Claims 1 through 23 and 34 through 39, the other claims
pending in the above-identified application, stand withdrawn from
consideration by the Examiner as being directed to a non-elected invention.
We have jurisdiction pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 134.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007