1 The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written 2 for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board 3 4 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 5 ____________________ 6 7 BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS 8 AND INTERFERENCES 9 ____________________ 10 11 Ex parte DAVID MOSS 12 ____________________ 13 14 Appeal 2006-3167 15 Application 10/320,2951 16 Technology Center 3700 17 ____________________ 18 19 Decided: March 29, 2007 20 ____________________ 21 22 Before: MURRIEL C. CRAWFORD, STUART S. LEVY, and ROBERT E. 23 NAPPI, Administrative Patent Judges. 24 25 LEVY, Administrative Patent Judge. 26 27 28 DECISION ON APPEAL 29 30 STATEMENT OF CASE 31 Appellant appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134 (2002) from a final rejection 32 of claims 23-32. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b) (2002). 33 Appellant invented a package for a bar of soap. (Specification 1). 34 1 Application filed December 16, 2002. The real party in interest is Unilever Home & Personal Care USA, Division of Conopco, Inc.Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013