1 The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written for
2 publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.
3
4
5
6 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
7 _____________
8
9 BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
10 AND INTERFERENCES
11 _____________
12
13 Ex parte RAVINDRA R. MANTENA, CHRISTINA L. MATTOON,
14 BIJAY SATPATHY and JULIE A. WHEELER-CYRAN
15 _____________
16
17 Appeal No. 2007-0770
18 Application No. 09/752,330
19 Technology Center 3600
20 ______________
21
22 Decided: April 23, 2007
23 _______________
24
25 Before TERRY J. OWENS, HUBERT C. LORIN, and ROBERT E. NAPPI
26 Administrative Patent Judges.
27
28 NAPPI, Administrative Patent Judge.
29
30
31 DECISION ON APPEAL
32
33 This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 of the final rejection of
34 claims 1 through 48. For the reasons stated infra we affirm the Examiner’s
35 rejection of these claims.
36
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013