Appeal No. 1998-0750
Application 08/232,135
their specification that the essential function of a current
mirror is to provide identical currents at its outputs.
Accordingly, even if Fukuoka’s feedback line and the output line 9
were to be considered, the lines could not constitute a current
mirror because there is no teaching that the currents on the two
lines are the same. Although the two lines share a common
voltage, their impedances are different and the resulting currents
would also be different. Fukuoka’s feedback line exhibits the
impedance of the differential amplifier 1 and the line 9 exhibits
the impedance of a signal electrode of the display device.
Summary
The rejection of claims 4 and 61-63 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Kanayama is sustained.
The rejection of claims 1 and 6 under 35 U.S.C § 103 as being
unpatentable over Kanayama and Kumar is sustained.
The rejection of claims 7, 11-13, 17, 18, 24, 25, 28, 29, 32-
35, 47, 48, 50 and 53-60 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Fukuoka is sustained as to claims 7, 11, 13, 17,
28, 29, 32 and 47 but reversed as to claims 12, 18, 24, 25, 33-35,
48, 50 and 53-60.
The rejection of claims 9, 10, 16, 19, 20, 27 and 49 under
16
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007