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2 for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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 JOHN RICCI, HAROLD ALEXANDER, HARRIET T. NAIMAN,
13 BRUCE L. HOLLANDER, and INGO KOZAK
14 ____________
15
16 Appeal 2006-2017
17 Application 09/784,284
18 Technology Center 3700
19 ____________
20
21 Decided: March 2, 2007
22 ____________
23
24
25 Before HUBERT C. LORIN, JENNIFER D. BAHR, and
26 ANTON W. FETTING, Administrative Patent Judges.
27
28 LORIN, Administrative Patent Judge.
29
30 ORDER REQUIRING APPELLANTS TO BRIEF AN ADDITIONAL
31 MATTER
32
33 The decision of the Examiner rejecting claims 2, 3, 8-10, 15-17, 22-24
34 and 29 over the prior art is appealed. 35 U.S.C. § 134 (2002). We have
35 jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6 (b) (2002).
Page: 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013