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for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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 TORU NAKAMURA, TOSHIMI NISHIOKA, TAKUYA HOGA,
NOBUYUKI KUROKAWA, JUNICHI FUKUZAWA, HORST-TORE LAND
and FREDY HELMER-METZMANN
__________
Appeal No. 2006-2693
Application No. 09/000,330
__________
ON BRIEF
__________
Before ADAMS, GRIMES, and LINCK, Administrative Patent Judges.
GRIMES, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This appeal involves claims to toner. The examiner has rejected the claims as
obvious and inadequately described. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 134. We
affirm the obviousness rejection and reverse the written description rejection.
Background
The specification describes “toner for developing an electrostatically charged
image of a heat roller type copier or printer.” Page 7. The toner contains binder resin,
colorant and charge control agent. The colorant may be carbon black, diazo yellow,
phthalocyanine blue, quinacridone, carmine 6B, monoazo red, or perylene. Id.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007