Appeal No. 1997-2404
Application 08/368,133
USPQ 1125, 1127 (Fed. Cir. 1984). In addition, the Federal
Circuit reasons in Para-Ordnance, 73 F.3d at 1088-89, 37
USPQ2d at 1239-40, that for the determination of obviousness,
the court must answer whether one of ordinary skill in the art
who sets out to solve the problem and who had before him in
his workshop the prior art, would have been reasonably
expected to use the solution that is claimed by the
Appellants.
Turning to Tatsuno, we find that Tatsuno teaches
structure completely different from that of Sheridon. Tatsuno
is not concerned with providing a charge to cause the
particles to twist to provide the display. Instead, Tatsuno
teaches that the light causes the particles to change charge
and repel from electrode (11) and are attracted to lattice
electrode (10). They are then passed through lattice
electrode (10) with the voltage gradient while losing the
negative charge due to the shielding of light and are absorbed
on the surface electrode (12). There is nothing in Tatsuno
that would suggest to those skilled in the art to use light
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007