Appeal No. 1996-1387 Page 12
Application No. 08/110,269
Br. at 27.) It is unclear to which of the discussions the
appellant refers. We have rejected many of his arguments.
Accordingly, the statement shows no error in the rejection.
Therefore, we affirm the rejection of claims 25 and 26. Next,
we address claims 2-4.
Claims 2-4
Regarding claims 2-4, the appellant argues, “Ogino's
coolant cools the wrong elements. His coolant cools the
Fresnel lens 15a and lens 36'. His coolant does not cool the
liquid crystal 10.” (Appeal Br. at 35.) The examiner
replies, “Ogino discloses a liquid crystal panel which is
comprised of a coolant from [sic] removing heat from the
liquid crystal (col. 9, lines 42 to 52).” (Examiner’s Answer
at 6-7.)
We cannot find that the combination of Majima in view of
Nakamura further in view of Ogino teaches or would have
suggested the coolant of claims 2-4. The claims specify in
pertinent part a “coolant for removing heat from the shutter.”
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007