Appeal No. 2006-2480
Application No. 10/384,862
We have carefully considered the arguments raised by appellant in the
request for rehearing, but none of these arguments are persuasive that the
original decision was in error. We are still of the view that the invention set forth
in claims 1 and 3-10 is not patentable over the applied prior art based on the
record before us in the original appeal.
We have granted appellant‘s request to the extent that we have
reconsidered our decision of Sept. 27, 2006, but we deny the request with
respect to making any changes therein.
REHEARING DENIED
JERRY SMITH )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
LANCE LEONARD BARRY ) APPEALS AND
Administrative Patent Judge ) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
HOWARD B. BLANKENSHIP )
Administrative Patent Judge )
JS/jaj/rwk
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007