Appeal No. 1998-0495
Application No. 08/324,540
establish a prima facie case of obviousness for all of claims
8, 10 through 12, 14 through 18, 21, 24 through 28, 30 through
36, 40, and 44.
Instead of requiring each pixel electrode to be formed
over the intersection of the bit and word lines, claims 39 and
41 recite that the common electrode is formed substantially in
the same plane as the pixel electrodes. The examiner adds
Soref to the primary combination of references as an example
of the additional limitation. The examiner's reason for
modifying Lloyd to include such a structure is (Answer, page
8) "because this is a conventional way to form a common
electrode in an LCD." However, the mere existence of such a
structure in a single reference hardly suffices for a showing
of conventionality. Further, the examiner has pointed to no
teaching or suggestion in any of the references which would
indicate the desirability of forming the common electrode in
the same plane as the pixel electrodes. Consequently, the
examiner again has failed to establish a prima facie case of
obviousness, and we cannot sustain the rejection of claims 39
and 41.
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007