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journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 34
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte HIROSHI KAWASHIMA, KENGO AKIMOTO,
HIDEAKI YAMADA and SAKAYU SHIMIZU
____________
Appeal No. 1996-0833
Application No. 08/230,8791
____________
HEARD: January 11, 2000
____________
Before WILLIAM F. SMITH, LORIN, and SPIEGEL, Administrative Patent Judges.
SPIEGEL, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the examiner finally rejecting claims 1
through 16 and refusing to allow claims 17 through 28 as amended subsequent to the final rejection,
which are all of the claims pending in this application. Claim 1 is illustrative:2
1Application for patent filed April 20, 1994. According to appellants, this application is a continuation of
Application 07/953,096, filed September 29, 1992, now abandoned.
2The amendment filed August 22, 1995 (Paper No. 24), amending claims 17-28, was entered by the examiner
in the communication mailed October 5, 1995 (Paper No. 25).
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007