Appeal 1997-1635
Application 08/319,667
(3) JP-A 117 716/75,
none of which are written in English.
a. We have been able to decipher but two of
the documents given that we have been favored with
translations only of (1) and (2).
b. In the Examiner's Answer, a reference is
made to prior art identified as:
"90 48438, Mitsubishi Rayon (Japan), 03-1984."
The "03-1984" would appear to straightforwardly translate into
March 1984, both in English and Japanese.
c. We have a copy of PTO Translation No. 00-
2259 in the file wrapper, prepared under the direction of the
Scientific Library of the PTO, which in all respects appears
to be translation of "Document No. 03-3646." But, what does
"03-3646" have to do with "90 48438" cited by the examiner?
d. Buried underneath all the important papers
in the file wrapper, we located--not without some effort--a
curious one-page abstract attached to Japanese Patent Document
59-48438. A copy of the abstract accompanies this opinion as
Appendix 1.
- 7 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007