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for publication in a law journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 39
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte KEIZO ITO, TAKASHI KATO,
SHOJI SAKAIDA and HIKARU ANDO
____________
Appeal No. 95-4853
Application No. 08/019,3351
____________
HEARD: February 8, 1999
____________
Before GARRIS, WALTZ, and KRATZ, Administrative Patent Judges.
KRATZ, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal from the examiner's final
rejection of claims 1-10, which are all of the claims pending
1Application for patent filed February 18, 1993.
According to appellants, this application is a continuation of
Application No. 07/796,900 filed November 25, 1991, now
abandoned, which is a continuation of Application No.
07/599,468 filed October 18, 1990, now abandoned.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007