Appeal No. 97-2422
Application 07/939,720
display area and the driving area circuits as claimed. The
teachings of Misawa and the examiner's reasoning emphasize that
the same materials are deposited at the same time as the same
layer over the driver and display circuit per se to simplify
manufacturing processes.
The language of independent claim 1 of a “second substrate
substantially entirely opposed to the first substrate to form a
space therebetween” does not recite, as apparently asserted by
appellants in the brief and reply brief, a co-extensive size of
the first and second substrates. The quoted language merely
recites that the second substrate is substantially entirely
opposed with respect to the first substrate, meaning that the
second substrate may be smaller than the first substrate below
it. Likewise, and conversely, there is no positive statement of
this language in the claim and any other independent claim on
appeal such as claims 27 and 36, that the first substrate in turn
must be substantially entirely opposed to the second substrate.
Figures 1, 4D and 8 of Misawa clearly indicate that driving
circuits 12 and 21 in Figure 1 are formed on the same substrate
as the active matrix circuit 22 in this figure. The first
paragraph of column 4 of Misawa also implies that the top and
bottom substrates are the same size. Notwithstanding these
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007