Appeal No. 95-2489
Application 07/826,207
substantial numbers of said aggregate particles each including a photovoltaic core and a
dielectric shield;
said dielectric shield at least partially encapsulating said photovoltaic core;
said photovoltaic core including bipolar junction diode material which generates an electric
potential in the presence of light;
whereby said electroviscous fluid has an electroviscous response upon exposure of at least
some [sic] said photovoltaic cores to light and to an externally applied electric field.
References
The following references are relied upon by the examiner in support of the rejection of the claims
for obviousness:
Block et al. (Block) 4,687,589 Aug. 18, 1987
Pedersen 4,737,886 Apr. 12, 1988
Inoue3 63-97694 Apr. 28, 1988
Japanese Kôkai Patent Publication
Grant et al. (Grant & Hackh’s Chemical Dictionary), Grant & Hackh’s Chemical Dictionary,
5th Edition, McGraw-Hill, Inc., pp. 120 and 524 (1987).
Rejection
Claims 1-5, 7-12, 19, 20, 22 and 26 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable
over Block in view of Inoue and Peterson, taken further with Grant & Hackh’s Chemical Dictionary.4
3Our consideration of this reference is based on an English translation which is of record.
4This rejection is a new ground of rejection because none of the rejections stated in the final rejection relied upon the
Grant & Hackh’s Chemical Dictionary. See page 7 of the examiner’s answer. The final rejection included four grounds
of rejection: a rejection of claims 5 and 20 under the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112, a rejection of claims 6 and 23 under
(continued...)
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007