Ex parte SAMPICA et al. - Page 2


          Appeal No. 97-3474                                                          
          Application No. 08/431,211                                                  

          This is said to minimize strain on the LCD and to allow                     
          disassembly of the optical components without damaging the LCD.             
               Representative independent claim 1 is reproduced as                    
          follows:                                                                    
               1. A liquid crystal display stack-up comprising:                       
               a liquid crystal display having a first surface;                       
               a first optical component having a first surface;                      
               the first surface of the liquid crystal display and the                
          first surface of the first optical component are substantially              
          planar glass surface; and                                                   
               a first layer of silicone gel positioned between the first             
          surface of the liquid crystal display and the first surface of              
          the first optical component, the first layer of silicone gel                
          attaching the first optical component to the liquid crystal                 
          display.                                                                    
               The examiner relies on the following references:                       
          Iwashita et al.     4,715,686           Dec. 29, 1987                       
          (Iwashita)                                                                  
          Filas et al.        5,217,811           Jun.  8, 1993                       
          (Filas)                                                                     
          Kawaguchi et al.    5,243,453           Sep.  7, 1993                       
          (Kawaguchi)                                                                 
          Sirkin et al.       5,275,680           Jan.  4, 1994                       
          (Sirkin)                                                                    
               Claims 1, 2, 6, 7 and 11 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.                
          '  103 as unpatentable over Sirkin in view of Filas.  Claims 12             
          and 13 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. '  103 as unpatentable over           
          Sirkin in view of Filas in further view of Iwashita.  Claims 1,             
          4, 5, 11 and 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. '  103 as                    
          unpatentable over Kawaguchi.                                                

                                          2                                           



Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007