Ex parte KOIKE et al. - Page 1





                   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                          (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 32         
                       UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                      
                                     ____________                                     
                          BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                          
                                   AND INTERFERENCES                                  
                                     ____________                                     
              Ex parte MASAHIRO KOIKE, FUMINOBU TAKAHASHI, HIDEKI INOUE,              
              YOSINORI MUSHA, SHUUJI KAMIMOTO, SHINJI NAITO, and TSUKASA              
                                        SASAKI                                        
                                     ____________                                     
                                 Appeal No. 1999-1663                                 
                              Application No. 08/715,221                              
                                     ____________                                     
                                Heard: October 12, 2000                               
                                     ____________                                     
          Before HAIRSTON, BARRY, and LEVY, Administrative Patent Judges.             
          LEVY, Administrative Patent Judge.                                          


                                  DECISION ON APPEAL                                  
               This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C.  134 from                
          the examiner's final rejection of claims 1, 4 and 12.1                      
                                     BACKGROUND                                       
               The appellant's invention relates to a stress evaluation               
          method for evaluating stress on a test piece based on changes               
          in  acoustic velocity.  An understanding of the invention can               

               1The rejection of claims 5-10 and 13 under 35 U.S.C.  103 has been    
          withdrawn by the examiner (answer, pages 7 and 8).                          





Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007