1 The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written
2 for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.
3
4
5 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
6 ____________
7
8 BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
9 AND INTERFERENCES
10 ____________
11
12 Ex parte JOSE V. TRAVEZ and ITALO D. TRAVEZ
13 ____________
14
15 Appeal No. 2006-1325
16 Application No. 10/163,610
17 Technology Center 3600
18 ____________
19
20 Before TERRY J. OWENS, JENNIFER D. BAHR, and ROBERT E.
21 NAPPI, Administrative Patent Judges.
22
23 BAHR, Administrative Patent Judge.
24
25 STATEMENT OF THE CASE
26 Jose V. Travez and Italo D. Travez (Appellants) appeal under
27 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1, 4-22 and
28 24-35, the only claims pending in the application. We have jurisdiction over
29 this appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 6.
30 We AFFIRM-IN-PART and REMAND.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013