Appeal No. 1998-0888
Application 08/314,036
microtip electron emitters, these are the same limitations
addressed with respect to the rejection of claim 1.
The Examiner finds that Spindt "does not build the FED
back structure with multiple separate plate sections coupled
to a single anode . . ., but instead the Spindt et al. display
panel (11) is made up of a single cathode (emitter) backing
plate with each [?, suggests plural] plate having plural
electron emitters on it coupled to a single anode" (FR3).
However, in the Examiner's Answer, the Examiner finds that
Spindt teaches "a plurality of emitter plates (figure 2, item
14 or figure 5, item[s] 31-33)" (EA5), which is the same
finding as with regard to claim 1. The Examiner's Answer
further states (EA6):
The Spindt et al. design[,] to summarize [the]
above[,] meets all of the limitations of claim 9, except
for if one was to interpret the claims in light of the
specification. To be specific[,] Spindt et al. does not
assemble separate individual emitter plates to form his
back structure[;] in contrast[,] his emitter plates are
in individual sections which make up a solid one piece
continuous[-]type structure. Spindt et al. does not use
this [disclosed] modular building technique.
The Examiner finds that Van Gorkom and Yamagishi disclose
combining independent, modular FED emitter plates to form one
large continuous FED image (FR3; EA6-7). The Examiner
- 8 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007