Appeal No. 1998-0495
Application No. 08/324,540
review, we will affirm the obviousness rejections of claims 42
and 43 and reverse the obviousness rejections of claims 8, 10
through 12, 14 through 18, 21, 24 through 28, 30 through 36,
39 through 41, and 44.
Regarding the rejection of claim 42, appellant contends
(Brief, page 11) that the references do not teach how to
substitute PDLC for the liquid crystal material of Lloyd since
they function differently. However, Lloyd discloses (column
1, lines 18-24) that in the absence of an applied potential,
the liquid crystal material is clear, and the reflective cell
appears black, whereas in the presence of an electric
potential, the liquid crystal scatters light, and the cell
appears white. Doane teaches (column 2, line 61-column 3,
line 1) that PDLC scatters light when no electric field is
applied, thereby appearing white, and transmits light when an
electric field is applied. Further, Doane explains (column
12, lines 50-52) that a reflective background improves the on-
off visual contrast. (With a reflector, the display will
appear black when the electric field is applied.) Thus, the
two visual states are the same as for the liquid crystal of
Lloyd, except that a PDLC's white state appears in the absence
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007