The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written for publication and
is not precedent of the Board.
Paper No. 29
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte MIGAKU SUZUKI
____________
Appeal No. 2000-0287
Application No. 08/663,300
____________
ON BRIEF
____________
Before McCANDLISH, Senior Administrative Patent Judge, ABRAMS and JENNIFER D.
BAHR, Administrative Patent Judges.
JENNIFER D. BAHR, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal from the examiner's refusal to allow claims 1-19, which are
all of the claims pending in this application. An amendment to claims 1, 13, 16, 17 and 19 and
a substitute specification (Paper No. 16), filed February 5, 1999 subsequent to the final
rejection, have both been entered (see Paper No. 17 and page 2 of the answer). The
amendment after final rejection to claims 13 and 17 filed concurrently with the brief (Paper No.
20) and again with the reply brief (see Paper Nos. 24 and 26) and the amendment (Paper No.
27) to the specification filed concurrently with the reply brief have not been entered (see Paper
No. 28). We additionally note that the appellant's substitute specification filed February 20,
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007