Ex Parte NAKAZONO 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              The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 22            
                        UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                                             
                                                 ____________                                                 
                             BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                                               
                                          AND INTERFERENCES                                                   
                                                 ____________                                                 
                          Ex parte EIICHIRO NAKAZONO and AKITOMO YAMASHITA                                    
                                                 ____________                                                 
                                             Appeal No. 2002-0500                                             
                                           Application No. 09/258,320                                         
                                                 ____________                                                 
                                                   ON BRIEF                                                   
                                                 ____________                                                 
            Before KRASS, FLEMING, and BARRY, Administrative Patent Judges.                                   
            BARRY, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                               


                                            DECISION ON APPEAL                                                
                   A patent examiner rejected claims 1, 5-11, 14-20, 24-26, and 32-39.  The                   
            appellants appeal therefrom under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a).  We affirm-in-part.                         


                                               BACKGROUND                                                     
                   The invention at issue on appeal is a fan for cooling a semiconductor device.              
            Figures 7 and 8 of the appellants' specification show a conventional such fan.  (Spec.            
            at 1.)  In the conventional fan, a housing 141 having an open side and a cup-shape is             
            protrusively formed on a recess of a frame 101.  The housing secures a sleeve 105.                








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

Last modified: November 3, 2007