THIS OPINION WAS NOT WRITTEN FOR PUBLICATION
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for publication in a law journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 33
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_____________
Ex parte TOSHIHISA KENMOCHI, KAZUYUKI
OKUI, HIROSHI OSADA, TAKASHI MAEDA,
MAKAOTO SHIOKAWA, TSUYOSHI YAMASHITA
and MITSUO NAKAMURA
_____________
Appeal No. 94-4094
Application 07/900,7691
______________
ON BRIEF
_______________
Before JOHN D. SMITH, GARRIS and PAK, Administrative Patent
Judges.
JOHN D. SMITH, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal pursuant to 35 USC § 134 from the final
rejection of claims 2, 3, 5 through 7, and 9 through 16.
Claim 11 is representative and is reproduced below:
1 Application for patent filed June 19, 1992. According to appellants, the
application is a continuation of Application 07/512,627, filed April 19, 1990,
now abandoned, which is a continuation of Application 07/263,921, filed October
28, 1988, now abandoned.
1
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007