Ex Parte YAMAGUCHI et al - Page 1



          The opinion in support of the decision being entered today is not           
          binding precedent of the Board.                                             
                                                            Paper No. 11              
                      UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                       
                                     __________                                       
                         BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                           
                                  AND INTERFERENCES                                   
                                     __________                                       
                   Ex parte KOZO YAMAGUCHI and YOSHINORI MIYAISHI                     
                                     __________                                       
                                Appeal No. 2001-1596                                  
                               Application 09/296,102                                 
                                     ___________                                      
                                      ON BRIEF                                        
                                     ___________                                      
          Before CALVERT, FRANKFORT, and NASE, Administrative Patent                  
          Judges.                                                                     
          CALVERT, Administrative Patent Judge.                                       


                                 DECISION ON APPEAL                                   
               This is an application for reissue of patent No. 5,643,119             
          (“the patent”), which issued on July 1, 1997, based on                      
          Application 08/574,914, filed December 19, 1995 (“the original              
          application”).  The instant application was filed on April 21,              
          1999.                                                                       

               Appellants seek review of the final rejection of August 4,             
                                          1                                           




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

Last modified: November 3, 2007