1 The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was
2 not written for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.
3
4
5 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
6 _____________
7
8 BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
9 AND INTERFERENCES
10 _____________
11
12 Ex parte DANIEL ALEXANDER LLOYD WALKER
13 _____________
14
15 Appeal No. 2007-1883
16 Application No. 10/469,203
17 Technology Center 3600
18 ______________
19
20 Decided: September 25, 2007
21 _______________
22
22 Before WILLIAM F. PATE, III, MURRIEL E. CRAWFORD, and ANTON W.
23
23 FETTING, Administrative Patent Judges.
24
25
25 PATE, III, Administrative Patent Judge.
26
27
28
29 DECISION ON APPEAL
30
31
32 STATEMENT OF THE CASE
33
34 This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims 25-30 and 32-48. Claim
35 31 stands objected to as containing allowable subject matter. These are the only
36 claims remaining in the application. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. §§ 134
37 and 6.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013