Appeal No. 1997-3153
Application 08/443,389
even that broad invention would not have been suggested by the
applied prior art within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 103.
The essence of claim 10 is that the invention comprises
an electronic chip for demodulating an ultra-high frequency
disposed between at least two glass sheets. The prior art
applied by the examiner provides evidence that it was known to
place small wire antennas between the glass sheets of a
vehicle windshield (Shaw), and that it was known that a
printed circuit board having an amplifier could be attached to
an antenna on a vehicle windshield (Fumitaka). Neither Shaw
nor Fumitaka suggests that an electronic chip for demodulating
an ultra-high frequency signal could be located on the vehicle
windshield.
The only reference which relates an antenna and a
demodulator on the same circuit chip is Hahs. Hahs teaches
that small antennas and receivers can be manufactured on a
single circuit chip for use in devices such as pagers. Since
a receiver must contain a demodulator as a portion thereof,
the examiner uses Hahs to teach that an antenna and a
demodulator were being manufactured on the same circuit chip.
The examiner proposes to modify the antenna and amplifier of
-8-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007