Ex Parte Pan et al - Page 1



                 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                         for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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 ALFRED I-TSUNG PAN and HOWARD TAUB                                        
                                              ____________                                                 
                                            Appeal 2007-0655                                               
                                         Application 10/314,157                                            
                                         Technology Center 1700                                            
                                              ____________                                                 
                                        Decided: January 31, 2007                                          
                                              ____________                                                 

               Before EDWARD C. KIMLIN, CHUNG K. PAK, and THOMAS A.                                        
               WALTZ, Administrative Patent Judges.                                                        
               KIMLIN, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                        


                                        DECISION ON APPEAL                                                 
                      This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims 1-2 and 4-12.                   
               Claim 3 has been allowed and claims 13-20 have been withdrawn from                          
               consideration.  Claim 1 is illustrative:                                                    
                            1.  A fuel delivery system for a liquid-type fuel cell using                   
                      diluted fuel, said system comprising:                                                
                            a fuel tank containing a concentrated fuel; and                                




Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013