Ex parte TANAKA et al. - Page 1




          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          not written for publication and is not binding precedent of                 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. 25              

                      UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                       
                                     __________                                       
                         BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                           
                                  AND INTERFERENCES                                   
                                     __________                                       
                 Ex parte YUKIO TANAKA, AKIO TAKIMOTO, KOJI AKIYAMA,                  
                        YASUNORI KURATOMI, JUNKO ASAYAMA and                          
                                   HISAHITO OGAWA                                     
                                     __________                                       
                                Appeal No. 1999-0578                                  
                               Application 08/217,641                                 
                                     ___________                                      
                                      ON BRIEF                                        
                                     ___________                                      
          Before JERRY SMITH, GROSS and LEVY, 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 final rejection of claims 1-5, 8, 9, 14-                
          26, 29 and 30.  Claims 6, 7, 10-13, 27 and 28 were indicated                
          to contain allowable subject matter in the final rejection.                 
          In response to the appeal brief, the examiner withdrew the                  
          rejection of claims 5, 9 and 14-26.  Therefore, this appeal is              
                                          1                                           





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

Last modified: November 3, 2007