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not written for publication and is not binding precedent of the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. 27
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte OSAMU KONISHI
__________
Appeal No. 2004-0370
Application 09/083,086
___________
ON BRIEF
___________
Before OWENS, DELMENDO and PAWLIKOWSKI, Administrative Patent
Judges.
OWENS, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This appeal is from the final rejection of claims 12-21.1
1 Claim 6 is not before us on appeal, but is still pending.
In the amendment filed August 30, 2000 (paper no. 12, page 1) the
appellant stated that “[c]laims 1 to 4 and 6 to 11 remain in this
application.” In the next amendment (filed February 21, 2001,
paper no. 15) the appellant stated: “Cancel claims 1 to 4 and 7
to 11" (page 1). Claim 6 was not canceled. However, in that
same amendment the appellant stated that “[c]laims 12 to 21 are
now in this application.” This statement indicates that the
appellant intended to cancel claim 6. In the event of further
prosecution, claim 6 should be canceled.
1
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007