Appeal No. 96-1709
Application 08/149,361
Fujisawa does not meet or suggest the recitation in claim 1 of
a “single driver circuit which provides a common drive signal
to both said first and second liquid crystal displays” [brief,
page 11]. Appellants point out that Fujisawa applies one
drive signal to the CRT (CRT SYNC SIGNAL) and a different
drive signal to the LCD (LCD DRIVER CONTROL SIGNAL). The
examiner responds that the single driver circuit in Fujisawa
(controller 4) provides a common drive signal to drive both
the CRT and the LCD [answer, page 11].
Notwithstanding the examiner’s assertion to the
contrary, Fujisawa does not suggest the single driver circuit
providing a common drive signal to two displays. Although the
controller in Fujisawa may generate the drive signals based on
a common video input signal, the output of the controller is
in the form of two different drive signals as argued by
appellants. It appears to be the examiner’s position that
since the video drive signals are derived from the same input
signals, then the recitations of the independent claims are
satisfied. However, the drive signals exist at the output of
the controller and not at the input. As pointed out by
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007