Appeal No. 96-2085
Application No. 08/301,536
protective film 6 of Motonami before exposing the fuse to a
laser.
In conclusion, based on the foregoing, the examiner's
rejection of claims 9-11, 12, 13, 15 and 16 under 35 U.S.C. § 103
is reversed. The examiner's rejection of claims 22-26 under
§ 103 is affirmed. Accordingly, the examiner's decision
rejecting the appealed claims is affirmed-in-part.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in
connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR
§ 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED-IN-PART
EDWARD C. KIMLIN )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
CHUNG K. PAK ) BOARD OF PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
THOMAS A. WALTZ )
Administrative Patent Judge )
George O. Saile
20 McIntosh Dr.
Poughkeepsie, NY 12603
-7-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Last modified: November 3, 2007