Ex Parte Krulevitch 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                     written for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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 PETER KRULEVITCH, JULIE K. HAMILTON,                                  
                                     and HAROLD D. ACKLER                                             
                                         ________________                                             
                                          Appeal 2007-1019                                            
                                       Application 09/851,231                                         
                                      Technology Center 1700                                          
                                         ________________                                             
                                      Decided:  March 23, 2007                                        
                                         ________________                                             
              Before EDWARD C. KIMLIN, PETER F. KRATZ, and                                            
              JEFREY T. SMITH, Administrative Patent Judges.                                          
              KIMLIN, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                    

                                      DECISION ON APPEAL                                              
                     This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims 11-19.  Claim 11 is         
              illustrative:                                                                           
                     11.  An apparatus having a sealed open microchannel therein,                     
              comprising:                                                                             
                     an etched open substrate;                                                        

                                                                                                     



Page:  1  2  3  4  5  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013