Ex Parte Watson et al - Page 1



                          The opinion in support of the decision being entered              
                            today was not written for publication and                       
                              is not binding precedent of the Board.                        


                    UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                               
                                       _____________                                        
                         BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                                 
                                   AND INTERFERENCES                                        
                                       _____________                                        
                      Ex parte PETER WATSON, BRUNO GIROUARD and                             
                                  BERTHOLD FECTEALU                                         
                                       _____________                                        
                                      Appeal 2006-2196                                      
                                    Application 10/294,892                                  
                                      Technology Center                                     
                                       ____________                                         
                                    Decided: July 18, 2007                                  
                                      _______________                                       
             Before TERRY J. OWENS, STUART S. LEVY, and ANTON W.                            
             FETTING, Administrative Patent Judges.                                         
             OWENS, Administrative Patent Judge.                                            


                         DECISION ON REQUEST FOR REHEARING                                  

                  In our Decision mailed November 14, 2006 we affirmed the rejections       
             of claim 20 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) over Yasui ‘503, claims 20 and 21         
             under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) over Karpik, claims 1-19 and 21-61 under              




Page:  1  2  3  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013