Appeal No. 97-1932
Application 08/028,047
The examiner basically relies on Oess for teaching all
the features of independent claim 25 except for the plurality
of sharply-pointed cathode structures for each picture
element. Oess discloses a single “sharply-pointed” cathode
structure for each picture element. Kishino teaches the
desirability of using a plurality of sharply-pointed cathode
structures for each picture element. In the examiner’s view,
it would have been obvious to incorporate Kishino’s plural
cathode structure into Oess’ display device.
Appellant argues that the rejection is wrong as a
matter of law because Oess is not directed to field emission
displays and the combination of Oess with Kishino would
degrade the performance of the Oess display [brief, pages 9-
10]. The examiner disagrees with both of these contentions.
We are not persuaded by either of appellant’s arguments for
reasons which follow.
With respect to the first point argued by appellant,
we do not agree that the combination of Oess and Kishino
hinges as a matter of law on whether Oess is directed to an
FED. The question is whether Oess and Kishino are
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007