Ex Parte Park et al - Page 3




           Appeal No. 2006-1726                                                                     
           Application No. 09/725,849                                                               

                 A method of driving a liquid crystal display having liquid                         
           crystal pixel cells arranged at each intersection between a                              
           plurality of gate lines and a plurality of data lines in a matrix                        
           type and being driven with thin film transistors, said method                            
           comprising:                                                                              
                 applying a first signal to the liquid crystal pixel cells                          
           through said data lines for charging thereof during a beginning                          
           of a frame; and                                                                          
                 applying a second signal different from said first signal to                       
           the liquid crystal pixel cells through said data lines for                               
           discharging thereof during an ending of the frame.                                       

                                            References                                              
           The Examiner relies on the following references:                                         
           Miwa et al. (Miwa)         6,396,469           May 28, 2002                              
           Takahashi                  6,297,792           Oct  2, 2001                              
           Kubota et al. (Kubota)     5,907,313           May 25, 1999                              
                                      Rejections At Issue                                           
           A.  Claims 1, 4-5, 8, 11-14 and 16 stand rejected under 35                               
           U.S.C. § 102 as being anticipated by Takahashi.                                          
           B.  Claims 2, 3, 6 and 7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as                         
           being unpatentable over the combination of Takahashi and Miwa.                           
           C.  Claim 18 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being                              
           unpatentable over the combination of Takahashi and Kubota.                               


                 Rather than reiterating the arguments of Appellants and the                        
           Examiner, the opinion refers to respective details in the Briefs1                        
                                                                                                   
           1 Appellants filed an Appeal Brief on June 14, 2004.  Appellants filed a Reply           
                                                 3                                                  





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007