Appeal No. 97-1841
Application 08/315,052
side (a), an element back side with reflective
coatings (11) and partially on the element lamp
side (12), wherein the optic element has a light
transmissive characteristic (13), the element lamp
side (a) further having an elevated region (13)
with no reflective coatings thereon such that a
light channeling path (c) is present which tends
to direct light through the element lamp side
where the light is reflected off the element back
side (11) and exits through the element lamp side
(a). However, Palmquist does not disclose a lamp
disposed near the lamp side.
Meijer teaches the use of a lamp (306)
disposed near a lamp side of a reflective
optical apparatus (100,300) for the purpose of
illuminating the optical element.
It would have been obvious to one having
ordinary skill in the art at the time of
applicant’s invention to modify the apparatus of
Palmquist to include the light source disposed near
the lamp side of the apparatus as taught by
Meijer in order to illuminate the optical element.
(Final Rejection, pages 3-4)
OPINION
We have carefully reviewed the rejection on appeal in light
of the arguments of the appellant and the examiner. As a result
of this review, we have determined that the applied prior art
establishes a prima facie case of obviousness that has not been
rebutted by additional evidence from the appellant. Accordingly,
we will affirm the rejection of claim 1 on appeal.
It is our finding that Palmquist discloses an optical
element having a front side illuminated by both ambient light and
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007