Ex Parte Niwa et al - Page 2



          Appeal No. 2005-2287                                                        
          Application No. 09/767,588                                                  

               Representative independent claim 1 is reproduced as follows:           
               1.  A liquid crystal display having a first substrate and a            
          second substrate which are disposed with a predetermined gap                
          therebetween, in which liquid crystal is sealed in said gap,                
          comprising:                                                                 
               post structures for controlling the gap between said first             
          substrate and said second substrate;                                        
               a sealing material provided outside a display area for                 
          sealing said liquid crystal in said gap, and forming an open                
          injection hole for injecting said liquid crystal therethrough;              
               an end-sealing material for sealing said injection hole                
          after said liquid crystal is sealed in; and                                 
               injection hole post structures provided in an area near said           
          injection hole, for dividing said injection hole into a plurality           
          of portions by using the same material as said post structures,             
          wherein said injection hole post structures are formed from a               
          material which deteriorates a charge retention of said liquid               
          crystal less than said sealing material.                                    
               The examiner relies on the following references:                       
          Nakanowatari   4,820,025                     Apr. 11, 1989                  
          Ohashi et al. (Ohashi)      5,798,813        Aug. 25, 1998                  
          Saito et al. (Saito)        6,304,308        Oct. 16, 2001                  
          (filed Aug. 9, 1999)                                                        
               Claims 1, 9, 17, 20, and 21 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.             
          § 102(e) as anticipated by Saito.                                           
               Claims 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11, 16, 18, and 19 stand rejected            
          under 35 U.S.C. § 103.  As evidence of obviousness, the examiner            
          offers Saito with regard to claims 3, 5, 10, and 11, adding                 

                                         -2-                                          




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

Last modified: November 3, 2007