Appeal No. 97-1932
Application 08/028,047
sufficiently similar that the proposed combination of their
teachings would have been suggested to the artisan. Both
references relate to a display device which operates by
impinging electrons emitted from a cathode emitter onto an
anode attached to a phosphor layer. We are of the view that
the specific manner in which the electrons are created is not
fatal to the combination of these teachings. Thus, the Oess
teaching of thermionic cathodes does not preclude a cathode-
anode relationship as taught by Kishino. We agree with the
examiner that Kishino would have suggested to the artisan the
obviousness of using a plurality of sharply-pointed cathode
structures for each picture element of Oess.
With respect to the second point argued by appellant,
we do not agree with appellant that the modification of Oess
with Kishino would necessarily degrade the performance of the
Oess display. The examiner also disputes this contention, and
appellant offers no evidence which would support this bare
allegation. The examiner’s principle that plural cathodes
would increase the display of each picture element is
apparently correct as suggested by Kishino, and would appear
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007