Ex parte SEKINE - Page 1




            The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written
                   for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.         

                                                               Paper No. 28           
                      UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                       
                                    ____________                                      
                         BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                           
                                 AND INTERFERENCES                                    
                                    ____________                                      
                               Ex parte YUTAKA SEKINE                                 
                                    ____________                                      
                                Appeal No. 1997-3581                                  
                             Application No. 08/010,291                               
                                    ____________                                      
                                HEARD:  March 7, 2001                                 
                                    ____________                                      
          Before FLEMING, RUGGIERO, and BARRY, Administrative Patent                  
          Judges.                                                                     
          RUGGIERO, Administrative Patent Judge.                                      




                                 DECISION ON APPEAL                                   
               This is a decision on the appeal from the final rejection              
          of claims 1-5.  An amendment after final rejection filed                    
          November 27, 1996 amended claim 1, canceled claims 4 and 5,                 
          and added claim 6.  This amendment was approved for entry by                
          the Examiner as indicated in the Advisory Action of December                
          19, 1996.  Accordingly, the rejection of claims 1-3 and 6 is                
          before us on appeal.                                                        






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

Last modified: November 3, 2007