1 The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was
2 not written for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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 STEVEN R. FALTA, MOHINDER SINGH BHATTI,
13 SHRIKANT MUKUND JOSHI, and GARY SCOTT VREELAND
14 _____________
15
16 Appeal No. 2006-1708
17 Application No. 10/186,253
18 Technology Center 3700
19 ______________
20
21 Decided: May 30, 2007
22 _______________
23
24 Before MURRIEL E. CRAWFORD, JENNIFER D. BAHR, and ANTON W.
24 FETTING, Administrative Patent Judges.
25
26
26 CRAWFORD, Administrative Patent Judge.
27
28
29
30 DECISION ON APPEAL
31
32
33 STATEMENT OF THE CASE
34 Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 (2002) from a final rejection of
35 claims 1 and 2. Claims 3 and 4 have been withdrawn (Final Rejection 2; Br. 2).
36 We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b) (2002).
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013