Appeal No. 95-3835
Application 08/107,047
Each of appellant’s independent claims requires that the electrosetting composition
is cured. As indicated on page 733 of the portion of ECT provided by appellant, the liquid
crystal material in a liquid crystal device is in the form of a viscous fluid. The material is not
cured. If it were cured, the molecules could not switch back and forth between the two
positions shown in Fig. 5 of ECT (page 729) as the electrical field alternately is applied
and terminated, and the device would be inoperable.
Also, the examiner has set forth no explanation as to why or how one of ordinary
skill in the art would have modified the liquid crystal device such that the liquid crystal
material is cured.
For the above reasons, the examiner has not established a prima facie case of
anticipation or obviousness of appellant’s claimed invention over ECT.
DECISION
The rejections of claims 1-7 and 20-32 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, on
the ground that the specification fails to provide an enabling disclosure for the claimed
invention, and of claims 1-6, 20, 21, 23, 24, 26, 27, 29, 30 and 32 under 35
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007