The opinion in support of the decision being entered today
is not binding precedent of the Board.
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte HARIKLIA DRIS REITZ, SUJEET KUMAR,
XIANGXIN BI, NOBUYUKI KAMBE, RONALD J. MOSSO,
and JAMES T. GARDNER
____________
Appeal 2006-2776
Application 09/970,279
Technology Center 1700
____________
Decided: June 14, 2007
____________
Before BRADLEY R. GARRIS, CHUNG K. PAK, and
PETER F. KRATZ, Administrative Patent Judges.
KRATZ, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the Examiner’s refusal
to allow claims 21-37, the only claims that remain pending in this
application. Claims of the application have been at least twice rejected. We
have jurisdiction pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 6 (2006).
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013