Ex parte ZIMMERMAN - Page 3




          Appeal No. 97-1932                                                          
          Application 08/028,047                                                      



          plurality of sharply-pointed cathode structures being provided              
          per picture element, said array of sharply pointed cathode                  
          structures being separated from the extraction grid layer by a              
          second insulator layer, said electron emitter layer being                   
          formed of a material for emitting electrons under influence of              
          an electric field; and                                                      
               an envelope sealed to the face plate and enclosing the                 
          emitter layer, said extraction grid layer and said phosphor                 
          layer in a vacuum,                                                          
               said transparent face plate, said thin film phosphor                   
          layer, said conductive anode layer, said at least one                       
          insulator layer, said conductive extraction grid layer and                  
          said electron emitter layer forming a unitary, monolithic                   
          structure.                                                                  

          The examiner relies on the following references:                            
          Oess et al. (Oess)            4,020,381          Apr. 26, 1977              
          Shmulovich                    4,626,739          Dec. 02, 1986              
          Kishino et al. (Kishino)      5,153,483          Oct. 06, 1992              
          The admitted prior art disclosed in appellant’s specification.              
                                                                                     
          Claims 25, 26 and 29-34 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.                      
          § 103 as being unpatentable over the teachings of Oess in view              
          of Kishino.  Claims 27 and 28 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §              
          103 as being unpatentable over the teachings of Oess and                    
          Kishino and further in view of the admitted prior art.  Claims              
          13 and 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being                     
          unpatentable over the teachings of Kishino in view of                       
                                          3                                           





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

Last modified: November 3, 2007