Ex Parte YAU 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          not written for publication and is not binding precedent of the             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. 40              
                      UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                       
                                     __________                                       
                         BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                           
                                  AND INTERFERENCES                                   
                                     __________                                       
                 Ex parte WAI-FAN YAU, DAVID CHEUNG, SHIN-PUU JENG,                   
                            KUOWEI LIU, and YUNG-CHENG YU                             
                                     __________                                       
                                Appeal No. 2004-1888                                  
                             Application No. 09/477,126                               
                                     __________                                       
                                      ON BRIEF                                        
                                     __________                                       
          Before GARRIS, KRATZ, and JEFFREY T. SMITH, Administrative Patent           
          Judges.                                                                     
          GARRIS, Administrative Patent Judge.                                        
                              ON REQUEST FOR REHEARING                                
               This is in response to a request, filed November 17, 2004,             
          for rehearing of our decision, mailed September 16, 2004, wherein           
          we sustained the examiner’s section 103 rejection of all appealed           
          claims as being unpatentable over Sugahara in view of Chiang.               
               In their request, the appellants argue:                                
                    The Board errs in affirming the rejection of                      
               claims 68-73 since the Decision by the Board is based                  
                                          1                                           




Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007