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(2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 32
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte MASAHIRO KOIKE, FUMINOBU TAKAHASHI, HIDEKI INOUE,
YOSINORI MUSHA, SHUUJI KAMIMOTO, SHINJI NAITO, and TSUKASA
SASAKI
____________
Appeal No. 1999-1663
Application No. 08/715,221
____________
Heard: October 12, 2000
____________
Before HAIRSTON, BARRY, and LEVY, Administrative Patent Judges.
LEVY, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from
the examiner's final rejection of claims 1, 4 and 12.1
BACKGROUND
The appellant's invention relates to a stress evaluation
method for evaluating stress on a test piece based on changes
in acoustic velocity. An understanding of the invention can
1The rejection of claims 5-10 and 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 has been
withdrawn by the examiner (answer, pages 7 and 8).
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007