1 The opinion in support of the decision being entered
2 today is not binding precedent of the Board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 RICHARD D. ALLEN
13 ____________________
14
15 Appeal 2006-2888
16 Application 10/318,425
17 Technology Center 3600
18 ____________________
19
20 Decided: August 28, 2007
21 ____________________
22
23 Before: MURRIEL E. CRAWFORD, JENNIFER D. BAHR, and DAVID
24 B. WALKER, Administrative Patent Judges.
25
26 CRAWFORD, Administrative Patent Judge.
27
28
29 DECISION ON APPEAL
30
31 STATEMENT OF CASE
32 Appellant appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134 (2002) from a final rejection
33 of claims 1-19. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b) (2002).
34 Appellant invented a ramp with first and second side rails, each rail
35 having at least one slot for receiving at least one rung. The slots are
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013