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for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 37
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte FUMIKAZU MACHINO, TSUYOSHI HIGO, TOSHINOBU KATAOKA,
RYOICHI ONOUE, TOSHIO DATE and TOMINORI SATO
____________
Appeal No. 2004-0052
Application No. 09/180,432
____________
ON BRIEF
____________
Before WALTZ, DELMENDO, and JEFFREY T. SMITH, Administrative Patent
Judges.
WALTZ, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on an appeal from the primary examiner’s
final rejection of claims 1 through 12 and 15 through 43, which are
the only claims pending in this application. Claims 11, 12 and 43
were indicated as allowed by the examiner in the Answer (page 2).
Therefore the claims on appeal are claims 1 through 10 and 15
through 42. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 134.
According to appellants, the invention is directed to a
thermal acoustic insulation material comprising a multiplicity of
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007