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journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the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. 18
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte SHOICHI TANAMACHI and
KAZUTO KIMURA
____________
Appeal No. 96-2305
Application No. 08/149,6271
____________
HEARD: June 7, 1999
____________
Before HAIRSTON, BARRETT, and FRAHM, Administrative Patent
Judges.
HAIRSTON, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims 1
through 17. According to the examiner (Answer, page 1), claim
16 is now objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base
claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form
including all of the limitations of the base claim and any
1Application for patent filed November 9, 1993.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007