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for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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 BRUCE N. AMES and QING JIANG
__________
Appeal 2007-1138
Application 10/301,918
Technology Center 1600
__________
ON BRIEF
__________
Before SCHEINER, ADAMS, and LEBOV ITZ, Administrative Patent
Judges.
LEBOVITZ, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Claims 1 and 10 are appealed. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C.
§ 6(b). We affirm the rejection, but because the Examiner improperly
interpreted the claims, we designate it as a new ground of rejection.
STATEMENT OF CASE
Claims 1-16 and 21-24 are pending (Br. 1). Claim 2-9, 11-16, and 21-
24 are withdrawn from consideration (id.). Claims 1-10 stand finally
rejected and subject of this appeal (id.).
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013