Appeal No. 1997-0413
Application No. 08/231,570
[e.g., lens 54] for producing the virtual image viewable
through a viewing aperture.
As the examiner recognizes, Wells lacks the claimed
“direct visual display operably attached to the receiver.”
This claim language is interpreted to mean a typical display
device, such as shown at 16 in Figure 1A of the instant
application, as opposed to the miniature virtual display
shown, for example, at 12 in Figure 1A and as 12' in Figure
2A. Thus, Wells does not disclose the plurality of displays
[a miniature virtual display and a direct visual display]
required by the instant claims. 1
The examiner then turns to Lowell to supply the teaching
missing in Wells. Lowell discloses a plurality of displays,
as shown in Figure 1 of that patent. However, we can discern
no reason why the skilled artisan having Wells and Lowell
before him/her would have combined the teachings of these
disparate references in such a manner as to arrive at the
instant claimed subject matter. It is true that Lowell
1In fact, it is this combination of displays which
distinguishes the claimed subject matter of the instant
application from that of the parent application Serial No.
07/767,178.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007