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(2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 45
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte ICHIRO TOMINAGA, TAKETO MATSUKI, TETSUO YAMAGUCHI, HIROOMI
MATSUSHITA and KUNIO NIWA
____________
Appeal No. 95-4648
Application No. 07/952,1371
____________
HEARD: March 9, 1999
____________
Before SOFOCLEOUS, WALTZ, and SPIEGEL, Administrative Patent Judges.
WALTZ, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the
examiner’s final rejection of claims 28 through 47, which are
the only claims remaining in this application.
1 Application for patent filed September 28, 1992. According to
appellants, the application is a continuation of Application No.
07/403,263, filed September 5, 1989; which is a continuation-in-part
of Application No. 07/019,981, now abandoned.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007