The opinion is not binding precedent of the Board.
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte Mahalingam Santhanam and Wilbur S. Mardis
____________
Appeal 2007-2521
Reexamination 90/007,130
Application 10/936,831
Technology Center 1700
____________
Decided: September 28, 2007
____________
Before RICHARD E. SCHAFER, ADRIENE LEPIANE HANLON, and
RICHARD TORCZON Administrative Patent Judges.
SCHAFER, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Patentees appeal from the rejection of Claims 1-7 and 12-18. 35
U.S.C. §§ 134 and 306. We have jurisdiction. 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
1 An examiner finally rejected the claims under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
2 anticipated by the disclosure of Japanese Patent Publication 60-44352
3 (Yasuda).1 We affirm.
4
1 All page references to Yasuda are to the English translation of record.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013