The opinion in support of the decision being entered today is
not binding precedent of the Board.
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte GUENTER HENKE, KAMIL KALUS,
and ANNABELLE GUILLEUX
____________
Appeal 2007-1692
Application 10/415,009
Technology Center 1700
____________
Decided: July 31, 2007
____________
Before CHARLES F. WARREN, THOMAS A. WALTZ, and
CATHERINE Q. TIMM, Administrative Patent Judges.
TIMM, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner’s
decision rejecting claims 19, 20, 22-26, and 28-38. According to
Appellants, claims 1-18 and 21 have been canceled (Br. 3). The Examiner
has withdrawn the rejection of claim 27 (Answer 2). We have jurisdiction
under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013