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for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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 SIEGFRIED FICHTNER, JURGEN HOFMANN,
KARL MUSSIG, and DANIEL VERHOEVEN
____________
Appeal No. 2006-2534
Application No. 10/789,411
____________
HEARD: JANUARY 9, 2007
____________
Before RUGGIERO, SAADAT, and HOMERE, Administrative Patent Judges.
SAADAT, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner’s final rejection
of claims 1 and 15. Claims 4-13 have been allowed and claims 2, 3 and 14 have been objected to
by the Examiner as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but indicated as allowable if
rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of their base claim.
We affirm.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013