Ex parte KATSURABAYASHI et al. - Page 1




                    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          not binding precedent of the Board.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. 44              

                      UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                       
                                     __________                                       

                         BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                           
                                  AND INTERFERENCES                                   
                                     __________                                       

          Ex parte MASAHIKO KATSURABAYASHI, SUSUMU YAMAMOTO,                          
          TADAHIKO IKEGAYA and NOBUYUKI SHIGEEDA                                      
                                     __________                                       
                                Appeal No. 1998-0874                                  
                               Application 08/318,513                                 
                                     ___________                                      
                                      ON BRIEF                                        
                                     ___________                                      

          Before JERRY SMITH, JOSEPH F. RUGGIERO, and JOSEPH L. DIXON,                
          Administrative Patent Judges.                                               
          JERRY SMITH, Administrative Patent Judge.                                   

                                 DECISION ON APPEAL                                   
               This is a decision on the appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134                 
          from the examiner’s rejection of claims 1-3 and 6-29, which                 
          constitute all the claims remaining in the application.                     
                                          1                                           





Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007