Appeal No. 96-2276
Application 08/128,622
the shadow mask, such as the deformations caused by uneven
heating between the center and the sides of the shadow mask.
As disclosed in the specification, with reference to
embodiments shown in Fig. 5a and Fig. 6, the support frame
expands or contracts and bends. As a result, the frame shifts
the shadow mask relative to the display screen. The frame
makes these adjustments without further deforming the shadow
mask. (Spec., pg. 7, lines 1-7, and pg. 9, lines 2-21).
We do not interpret the language “for preventing
deformations” to mean preventing even the inherent
deformations caused by uneven heating of the shadow mask. As
is discussed in further detail below, we interpret the
language “for preventing deformations” to mean preventing
those deformations caused by interaction with the support
frame.
Accordingly, the rejection of claims 14-22 under 35
U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph as being indefinite is
reversed.
The Rejections over Prior Art
The examiner finally rejected claim 13 as being
anticipated by Ragland. Claim 13 includes a means-plus-
function clause. In In re Donaldson Co., 16 F.3d 1195, 1189,
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007