Appeal No. 96-1619
Application 08/263,015
shield is inherently flexible, and if the Kuhlman shield were
attached to a faceplate by a bezel as taught by Dickie or
Moritz, then the Kuhlman shield would inherently bend to
conform to the shape of the faceplate [answer, pages 4-6].
Appellant argues that there is no evidence that the
shield in Kuhlman is inherently flexible because the shield in
Kuhlman is shaped by thermal forming of the shield using a die
press, or applied pressure [brief, page 4]. We agree with
appellant that there is no evidence on this record that the
preformed shield in Kuhlman retains its flexibility after it
has been heated and formed and is ready for attachment to the
faceplate of a CRT. Since the shield in Kuhlman is designed
to be preformed to the shape of the faceplate before
attachment, there would be no reason why it needs to be
flexible. We find it incredible to assume that Kuhlman goes
to the trouble to thermoform his shield at high temperatures
if the material was naturally flexible at the time it is
placed on the faceplate. Thus, we find no evidence on this
record that the coated substrate of Kuhlman will be caused to
bend as the result of being affixed to the faceplate of a CRT
as recited in claim 22.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007