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publication in a law journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 23
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte TERUO NAKAGAWA
__________
Appeal No. 95-3889
Application 08/070,2961
___________
HEARD: November 3, 1998
___________
Before URYNOWICZ, THOMAS, and FLEMING, Administrative Patent
Judges.
URYNOWICZ, Administrative Patent Judge.
Decision on Appeal
This appeal is from the final rejection of claims 1-3 and 5-
11, all of the claims pending in the application.
The invention pertains to a sequence operation processor and
method. Claim 1 is illustrative and reads as follows:
1. A sequence operation processing apparatus for executing
operation instructions, said processing apparatus comprising:
1 Application for patent filed June 2, 1993.
1
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007