Ex Parte Ricci et al - Page 1



           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           2             for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.                          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