Appeal No. 1998-0750
Application 08/232,135
by the diodes will have uniform brightness (Kanayama column 6,
lines 44-58). This is compensating current dissipation. Whereas
the brightness of a pixel is clearly a function of the current
dissipation therein, as taught by Kanayama and indicated above, we
agree with the examiner that it would have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to
measure current dissipation in pixels of Kanayama as opposed to
the intensity of their emitted light so as to produce uniform
brightness in pixels in a display panel. A conclusion of
obviousness may be made from common knowledge and common sense of
the person of ordinary skill in the art without any specific hint
or suggestion in a particular reference. In re Bozek, 416 F.2d
1385, 1390, 163 USPQ 545, 549 (CCPA 1969).
Dependent claim 61 is not argued by appellants and we will
sustain its rejection for the reason given by the examiner. As to
dependent claim 62, Kanayama teaches compensating current
dissipation in a plurality of pixels. At column 6, lines 49-52,
the reference discloses that for diodes of a display panel that
produce weak light, the value of compensation data is decreased so
as to increase the length of time of light emission. With respect
to dependent claim 63, the measuring of current dissipation in a
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007