1 The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written
2 for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board
3
4 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
5 ____________________
6
7 BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
8 AND INTERFERENCES
9 ____________________
10
11 Ex parte MICHAEL SCHLICK, JUERGEN HOETZEL,
12 UWE ZIMMERMANN, RAINER MORITZ, BERNHARD LUCAS,
13 TORE TOENNESEN, HERMANN WINNER, MARTIN HUEPPAUFF,
14 WERNER UHLER, JOACHIM BULLA, and DIRK SCHMID
15 ____________________
16
17 Appeal 2007-2032
18 Application 10/275,1021
19 Technology Center 2800
20 ____________________
21
22 Decided: June 28, 2007
23 ____________________
24
25 Before STUART S. LEVY, LINDA E. HORNER, and DAVID B.
26 WALKER, Administrative Patent Judges.
27
28 LEVY, Administrative Patent Judge.
29
30
31 DECISION ON APPEAL
32
33 STATEMENT OF CASE
1 Application filed May 29, 2003. The real party in interest is Robert Bosch
GmbH of Stuttgart in the Federal Republic of Germany.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013