Ex parte HAGIWARA et al. - 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                    for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 23         
                       UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                      
                                     ____________                                     
                          BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                          
                                   AND INTERFERENCES                                  
                                     ____________                                     
            Ex parte YOSHIHIRO HAGIWARA, RYOSUKE UEMATSU, JUNICHI SUETSUGU,           
                          HITOSHI MINEMOTO, and KAZUO SHIMA                           
                                     ____________                                     
                                 Appeal No. 1999-1652                                 
                              Application No. 08/758,369                              
                                     ____________                                     
                                HEARD: August 16, 2001                                
                                     ____________                                     
          Before JERRY SMITH, DIXON, and BARRY, Administrative Patent                 
          Judges.                                                                     
          BARRY, Administrative Patent Judge.                                         



                                  DECISION ON APPEAL                                  
               This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from                
          the rejection of claims 1-4.  We reverse.                                   


                                     BACKGROUND                                       
               The invention at issue in this appeal is an ink jet                    
          recording head for ejecting liquid ink having charged toner                 
          particles therein.  As shown in Figure 1 of the appellants’                 
          specification, the recording head includes an ink reservoir 3               







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

Last modified: November 3, 2007