Appeal No. 97-1202
Application 08/061,557
Appellants argue (Brief, pages 9 and 10) that:
An indicator according to the invention comprises
"a lamp case which is light-transmissive to the light
emitted by at least one light-emitting element on one
side of the lamp case." The lamp case is further
defined as "being made from a material through which a
light indication of said at least one light-emitting
element is easily visible." Claims 1 and 4 to 6 also
state that the light indication is easily visible
"without being impaired by the reflection of ambient
light from a surface on another side" of the lamp case.
It is submitted that McLaughlin fails to suggest
an indicator having a lamp case as set forth in claims
1 and 4 to 6. The Examiner has failed to identify any
lamp case or body of an indicator which suggests the
claimed lamp case or body. Instead, the Examiner
alleged that the properties of the lamp case would have
been obvious. The Examiner's reasons for obviousness
are that a lamp case has to be light transmissive and
that it is common design practice to have light from
one side easily visible without being impaired by
reflections on the other surface. While these
properties may have been desirable, the Examiner has
not provided any suggestion as to why the claimed
material would have been obvious.
We agree with the examiner that a casing of some sort is
probably needed in McLaughlin (Figure 3) for the red light LED 62
and the green light LED 64 to operate together to produce yellow
light. On the other hand, we do not agree with the examiner
(Answer, page 4) that it would have been obvious that "the lamp
case would have been made from a material through which a light
indication of the at least one light-emitting element is easily
visible without being impaired by the reflection of ambient light
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007