Appeal No. 95-4152
Application 08/042,044
suggests providing an additional shield for the camera. The
rejection of claim 9 is sustained.
Claim 17 recites that the display apparatus is mounted to
a transparent face shield which is pivotally mounted to the
helmet. Figure 6 of Hanson shows a particular display
arrangement with the display screen 44 formed integral with
the video display 14. "The display screen 44 and the display
unit 14 can be rotated upwardly out of the line of sight of
the soldier. Display screen 44 is transparent so the soldier
may see through the screen when he is not focussing on images
on the screen." (Col. 6, lines 46-50). The transparent
display screen 44 functions both as a display and a face
shield. Figure 12 shows the same display apparatus with night
vision equipment 121 mounted on the top of the helmet.
Therefore, Hanson discloses the display limitations of
claim 17 and it is not necessary to rely on Coombs. In our
opinion, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill
in the art to combine the pivotally mounted display/face
shield of figures 6 and 12 with an infrared camera mounted in
front of the eye and below the helmet brim as shown in
figure 9 because this involves only simple mechanical mixing
- 19 -
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007