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for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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 SUKANTA BANERJEE, CECILIA GEORGESCU,
and MICHAEL SEUL
____________
Appeal 2006-2854
Application 10/348,165
Technology Center 1700
____________
Decided: March 28, 2007
____________
Before THOMAS A. WALTZ, PETER F. KRATZ, and
JEFFREY T. SMITH, Administrative Patent Judges.
SMITH, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Statement of the Case
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from a final rejection of
claims 1, 3-5, 7, 9-30, and 43-44. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C.
§ 6.1
Appellants’ invention relates to generating a plurality of microparticle
populations of different dye concentrations where dye is loaded into polymer
1 In rendering this decision we have considered the Appellants’ submissions
filed on March 6, 2006, March 8, 2006 and April 19, 2006.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013