Appeal No. 96-0196
Application 08/158,337
would have been a more pertinent reference than any of the
references cited by the examiner. Although the examiner was
apparently looking for a hand-held communication receiver
(claim 8), we note that claim 2 was not so limited (hand-held
electronic device). Thus, we assume that there is better
prior art available than what the examiner has presented to
us.
Nevertheless, we are constrained to decide the
obviousness issue based on the evidence of record in this
case. The evidence applied by the examiner suffers all the
deficiencies observed by appellant. The real image of Becker
is limited to a single row of pixels. Information for
different rows of the page are sequentially fed to the same
row of pixels, and the successive rows are caused to create a
virtual complete frame of information by a mirror which
redirects the same real image source to different virtual
image locations. The examiner proposes to eliminate Becker’s
mirror and to replace the single row of the real image with a
full page of rows for the real image. This modification would
produce Becker’s effect in exactly the opposite manner from
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007