Appeal No. 1998-0873
Application 08/301,279
Young 4,337,414 June 29, 1982
Claims 7-13 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Mossel, Young, and Muta.
We refer to the Final Rejection (Paper No. 12) (pages
referred to as "FR__") and the Examiner's Answer (Paper
No. 16) (pages referred to as "EA__") for a statement of the
Examiner's position, and to the Appeal Brief (Paper No. 15)
(pages referred to as "Br__") for a statement of Appellant's
arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
Obviousness
The Examiner's rejection attempts to show the
obviousness of the process of forming the phosphor layer.
As noted in the new ground of rejection, infra, such
process-of-making limitations are not entitled to patentable
weight in a product claim except to the extent they produce
a different product. Nevertheless, since the rejection is
not based on the product, we must consider the process
limitations.
The Examiner finds that Mossel teaches the concept of
spraying the inside of a linear tube with phosphor while
- 3 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007