Ex Parte Che 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         not written for publication and is not binding precedent of the            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                                        
                     UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                      
                                   _____________                                    
                         BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                         
                                 AND INTERFERENCES                                  
                                   _____________                                    
                                 Ex parte YONG CHE,                                 
                                  TAKESHI MORINOTO                                  
                                        and                                         
                                  MANABU TSUSHIMA                                   
                                  ______________                                    
                                Appeal No. 2005-0178                                
                              Application 10/091,502                                
                                  ______________                                    
                              HEARD: FEBRUARY 9, 2005                               
                                  _______________                                   
         Before WALTZ, JEFFREY T. SMITH, and PAWLIKOWSKI, Administrative            
         Patent Judges.                                                             
         PAWLIKOWSKI, Administrative Patent Judge.                                  
                                 DECISION ON APPEAL                                 
              This is a decision on appeal, under 35 U.S.C. § 134, from             
         the examiner’s final rejection of claims 1-16.                             
              Claims 1 and 11 are representative of the subject matter on           
         appeal, and are set forth below:                                           
         1.  A secondary power source, which comprises:                             
              a positive electrode consisting essentially of activated              
         carbon, from 0.1 to 20% by weight of a conductive material, and 1          
         to 20% by weight of a binder based on the total mass of the                
         positive electrode,                                                        
              a negative electrode consisting essentially of a carbon               
         material capable of doping and undoping lithium ions and 4 to 30%          
         by weight of a binder based on the total mass of the negative              
         electrode, and                                                             





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

Last modified: November 3, 2007