The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written
for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.
Paper No. 28
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_______________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_______________
Ex Parte NAOKO KIHARA, FUMIHIKO YUASA,
TOHRU USHIROGOUCHI, TSUKASA TADA,
OSAMU SASAKI, TAKUYA NAITO and SATOSHI SAITO
_______________
Appeal No. 1997-3051
Application 08/473,963
_______________
HEARD: January 25, 2001
_______________
Before, PAK, WALTZ and JEFFREY T. SMITH, Administrative Patent Judges.
JEFFREY T. SMITH, Administrative Patent Judge.
Decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134
Applicants appeal the decision of the Primary Examiner finally rejecting claims 33-
45, 47-49, 51, 52 and 54. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 134.1
1 The claims on appeal have been amended by an after final amendment, paper no. 10, filed
September 3, 1996. The Examiner indicated that upon filing the appeal, the amendment would be
entered. (Paper no. 11, mailed September 17, 1996 ). Claims 46 and 50, the only other claims pending
in this application, are objected to by the examiner as dependent on a rejected claim, but would be
allowable if rewritten in independent form. (Examiner’s Answer, page 2).
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007