Appeal No. 97-2422
Application 07/939,720
examiner relies upon Misawa in view of Sawatsubashi as to claims
1, 2, 7, 11 and 20, with the addition of Noguchi as to claims 21
through 33 and 36 through 43.
Rather than repeat the positions of the appellant and the
examiner, reference is made to the briefs and the answer for the
respective details thereof.
OPINION
For all the reasons expressed by the examiner in the answer,
and for the additional reasons presented here, we will sustain
both prior art rejections encompassing all claims on appeal under
35 U.S.C. § 103.
Appellant's assessment of the prior art at the top of page
2 of the specification indicates that silicon nitride is an
insulating film that has been used as a protective layer on top
of drive circuits for prior art liquid crystal displays to
protect them from moisture and movable ions. A protective
insulating film of silicon dioxide has been used over the liquid
crystal cells per se as well. Appellant's assessment of the
prior art in the paragraph bridging pages 2 and 3 of the
specification as filed also indicates that it was known in the
art to combine drive circuits and liquid crystal cell circuits on
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007