THIS OPINION WAS NOT WRITTEN FOR PUBLICATION
The opinion in support of the decision being entered today
(1) was not written for publication in a law journal and
(2) is not binding precedent of the Board.
Paper No. 41
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_______________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_______________
Ex parte YUTAKA HAYASHI, YOSHIKAZU KOJIMA,
RYOJI TAKADA, and MASAAKI KAMIYA
_______________
Appeal No. 95-3675
Application 08/025,8221
_______________
HEARD: Feb. 2, 1998
_______________
Before KRASS, LEE, and TORCZON, Administrative Patent Judges.
KRASS, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal from the final rejection of
claims 3 through 7, 9 and 10. Claims 1 and 11 through 19 have
been allowed. Claim 8 has been canceled. By amendment of
November 7, 1994 (Paper No. 23), claims 9 and 10 should
1 Application for patent filed March 3, 1993. According to
appellants, this application is a continuation of Application
07/492,085, filed March 12, 1990, now abandoned.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007