Ex parte YAMAMOTO et al. - Page 1




                    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               journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 23              


                      UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                       
                                  ________________                                    
                         BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                           
                                 AND INTERFERENCES                                    
                                  ________________                                    
                                      Ex parte                                        
            YORIHISA YAMAMOTO, YUTAKA NISHI, TAKASHI NISHIMORI, HIROYUKI              
          TOKUNAGA, and HIDEKI MACHINO                                                
                                  ________________                                    
                                Appeal No. 1999-1056                                  
                             Application No. 08/525,844                               
                                  ________________                                    
                             HEARD: February 23, 2000                                
                                  ________________                                    

          Before McQUADE, NASE, and GONZALES, Administrative Patent                   
          Judges.                                                                     
          GONZALES, Administrative Patent Judge.                                      


                                 DECISION ON APPEAL                                   


               This is a decision on an appeal from the examiner's final              

                                          1                                           





Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007