Appeal No. 1997-0189
Application No. 07/983,118
Upon careful review of the Mourey reference in light of
Appellant’s arguments, we are in agreement with Appellant’s
position as stated in the Brief. We do note that the
Examiner’s arguments in response (Answer, pages 6 and 7) are
correct to the extent that the Figure 4 embodiment of Mourey
rather than the Figure 2 illustration argued by Appellants has
been relied on for teaching the offset feature. A review of
Mourey’s Figure 4 and accompanying description, however,
reveals the same deficiency as with the arrangement of Figure
2, i.e., a gap or spacing exists between the bottom edge of
color display element 211 and the top edge of element 213
negating any edge alignment as claimed. We further note that
the line B-B’ in Figure 4 of Mourey referred to by the
Examiner as an aligning line is actually described at col.
6, line 16 of Mourey as defining an axis of symmetry. In our
view, the description of any of the various embodiments of
Mourey cannot reasonably lead to the conclusion that the
arrangement of the top and bottom edges of adjacent display
elements meets the alignment feature as claimed.
We further agree with Appellant’s arguments that the
Examiner has failed to provide proper motivation for the
13
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007