Appeal No. 1996-1387 Page 19
Application No. 08/110,269
at 34.) The examiner replies, “since the claim is broad,
prior art may read on the claim.” (Examiner’s Answer at 11.)
We agree with the examiner and address claims 19 and 21
seriatim. Claim 19 specifies in pertinent part “an infra-red
reflective layer positioned adjacent the shutter, for reducing
infra-red light reaching the shutter.”
The appellant erred by reading the limitation of a
coating into claim 19. Comparison of the combination to the
claim language evidences that the references would have
suggested an IR-reflective layer, which is positioned adjacent
a shutter. As noted by the examiner, (Examiner’s Answer at 5-
6) and as aforementioned regarding claim 16, Bornhorst employs
an interference filter to filter energy in the near IR region
before it reaches an LC layer. The filter is positioned
between the layer and a lamp. Figure 1 shows that the filter
is located adjacent to the layer. The reference’s
interference filter teaches or suggests the claimed IR-
reflective layer. Its location teaches or suggests the
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007