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for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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 AROOPRATAN D. PANDYA
______________
Appeal 2007-0760
Application 09/974,373
Technology Center 2100
____________
Decided: June 6, 2007
____________
Before JOHN C. MARTIN, JEAN R. HOMERE, and JAY P. LUCAS,
Administrative Patent Judges.
HOMERE, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellant appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the Examiner’s Final
Rejection of claims 1 through 32. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C.
§ 6(b) to decide this appeal.
Appellant invented a method and system for monitoring a client (150,
155) real-time activity on a server website (110) in a disconnected
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013