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for publication in a law journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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 NORIO YOKOTA, NICHITAKA SATO, KATSUJI MUKAI,
TOSHIYUKI ISHINOHACHI, HIDEHO HAYASHI, ISAO HASHIMOTO,
MIKIO MURAO, SHOZO KANAMORI, CHIKANORI KUMAGAI
and TATSUYA WATANABE
____________
Appeal No. 98-1563
Application No. 08/469,1981
____________
ON BRIEF
____________
Before COHEN, STAAB, and NASE, Administrative Patent Judges.
NASE, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal from the refusal of the examiner to
allow claims 39 and 52, as amended subsequent to the final
rejection. Claims 40 through 51 and 53, the only other claims
1Application for patent filed June 6, 1995. According to
the appellants, the application is a continuation of
Application No. 08/174,693, filed December 27, 1993, now U.S.
Patent No. 5,478,234.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007