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is not binding precedent of the Board.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 HERIBERT SCHWARZ,
THOMAS SEITH and
ARTUR WEIGAND
____________
Appeal 2007-2193
Application 10/816,369
Technology Center 1700
____________
Decided: August 16, 2007
____________
Before BRADLEY R. GARRIS, THOMAS A. WALTZ, and
CATHERINE Q. TIMM, Administrative Patent Judges.
GARRIS, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 the final rejection of claims
1-7, 9, 11, and 13-22.1 We have jurisdiction over the appeal pursuant to
35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
1 Claim 18 is not included in the “Claims Appendix” of the Brief. However,
it is clear from the record and Appellants’ statement that “Claims 1-7, 9, 11
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013