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2 for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board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 VINCENT E. ANIWANOU
12 ____________________
13
14 Appeal 2006-3406
15 Application 10/383,906
16 Technology Center 3700
17 ____________________
18
19 Decided: March 30, 2007
20 ____________________
21
22 Before: MURRIEL E. CRAWFORD, STUART S. LEVY, and ANTON W.
23 FETTING, 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 1-71. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b) (2002).
1 Application filed March 7, 2003. Appellant claims the benefit of
Provisional application 60/367,038, filed March 25, 2002 (Specification 1).
The real party in interest is the inventor (Br. 2).
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013