Appeal No. 96-0882
Application No. 07/885,217
Appellants’ Claim 1 is reproduced as follows:
1. A printer for printing an image on a recording
media in a manner suitable for display through a
lenticular face plate attached to the media subsequent
to the printing, comprising:
a media contained by the printer and having first
and second directions of printing;
light beam means for modulating a light beam
corresponding to ordered image data received by the
printer; and
an aperture intercepting the light beam and
restricting a projection area of the light beam onto
the media, said aperture and light beam means producing
pixels on the media by modulation of the beam and
restriction of the projection area, the pixels produced
directly on the media having a visible overlap in the
first direction and a different visible overlap in the
second direction.
The Examiner’s Answer lists the following prior art:
Gale et al. (Gale) 4,668,080 May 26, 1987
Saito et al. (Saito) 4,768,043 Aug. 30, 1988
Umeda et al. (Umeda) 4,775,896 Oct. 4, 1988
OPINION
This appeal involves three rejections. First, Claims 1-5
and 12-19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as anticipated by
Gale. Second, Claims 12 and 13 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007