Appeal No. 1998-2571
Application No. 08/515,383
Regarding the group of claims 31 and 32, we discuss claim
31. Appellant advocates [brief, page 5] that “Conway
discloses no second hinge having an axis of rotation fixed and
perpendicular with respect to the first axis of rotation.” We
have already discussed above that Conway does show a second
hinge having an axis of rotation which is fixed and
perpendicular with respect to the first axis of rotation.
Therefore, we sustain the anticipation rejection of claims 31
and 32 over Conway.
With respect to claim 33 and 34, Appellant argues [brief,
page 5] that “Conway et al. disclose no scissors mechanism nor
other means to translate to (sic) the display to a position
spaced from the top surface.” Relating to claim 33, scissors
mechanism is not claimed. Regarding the Appellant’s argument
that Conway has no “means to translate to (sic) the display to
a position spaced from the top surface,” we disagree with
Appellant. Conway indeed has means to move the display to one
orientation where it is parallel to the claimed top surface,
see fig. 1A, and means to move the display to the claimed
second orientation where it is not parallel to the claimed top
surface, see fig. 1B. Also, Conway has means to translate the
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007