Appeal No. 96-1368
Application 08/080,891
liquid crystal material is not polymerized or uniaxially
oriented and that the De Vaan patent fails to cure this
deficiency because its wedge-shaped elements are formed of
glass rather than of an oriented polymerized liquid crystal
monomer (Brief at 9). Again, this argument is unconvincing
because it fails to address the collective teachings of those
references. Furthermore, Appellants' additional argument that
the Tatsuno patent fails to disclose or suggest making its
wedge-shaped elements of a uniaxially oriented polymerized
crystalline monomer composition is unresponsive to the
rejection, which relies collectively on only Murty and De Vaan
for this teaching. We note that Appellants do not contend
that in the event Murty and De Vaan do collectively teach
wedge-shaped elements of such material, it nevertheless would
have been unobvious to use such material to form the wedge-
shaped elements in Tatsuno's three-wedge Wollaston prism.
For the foregoing reasons, the rejection of claims 2, 3,
5, and 11 as unpatentable for obviousness over Murty in view
of De Vaan and Tatsuno is affirmed.
- 13 -
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007