Ex Parte AHN - Page 2




          Appeal No. 2001-1982                                                        
          Application 08/892,716                                                      

                                     BACKGROUND                                       
               The invention relates to a front case for monitors having              
          injection molding gate landings on a cathode ray tube (CRT)                 
          seating surface.  Each gate landing is recessed so that the gate            
          flash is fully recessed below the seating surface to avoid an               
          interference between the gate flash and the CRT.  This removes an           
          extra flash grinding step in the manufacturing process.                     
               Claim 1 is reproduced below.                                           
                    1.  A front case for monitors, comprising:                        
                    a gate landing formed on a CRT seating surface of said            
               front case at a position around a gate flash remaining on              
               the case due to a gate of an injection mold used in an                 
               injection molding process of the case, said gate landing               
               being depressed to a depth suitable for fully recessing the            
               gate flash and avoiding an interference between the gate               
               flash and a cathode ray tube.                                          

               The examiner relies on the following references:                       
               Boudreau et al. (Boudreau)    5,565,934    October 15, 1996            
          (filed February 5, 1992)                                                    
               Arai et al. (Arai)            5,591,385     January 7, 1997            
          (filed December 21, 1994)                                                   
               Claims 1-14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being           
          unpatentable over Boudreau and Arai.  The rejection is set forth            
          in the second Office action (Paper No. 7).                                  
               We refer to the Office action (Paper No. 7), the final                 
          rejection (Paper No. 9), and the examiner's answer (Paper No. 19)           
          for a statement of the examiner's rejection, and to the appeal              
          brief (Paper No. 18) (pages referred to as "Br__") and reply                

                                        - 2 -                                         





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007