Appeal No. 1999-1574
Application No. 08/321,324
Digital Data Sys., Inc., 730 F.2d 1440, 1444, 221 USPQ 385,
388 (Fed. Cir. 1984).
The examiner rejects claims 1 to 3, 7 to 13, and 17 to 19
under this ground of rejection at pages 3 and 4 of the
examiner’s answer. We take claim 1 as illustrative of this
group. On pages 16 to 19 of the brief, appellant argues how
the Kitamura reference does not disclose the features recited
in claim 1. More specifically, appellant argues, brief at
page 19, that:
Appellant’s specification discloses that the
respective data for two apertures are alternately
supplied to each data electrode 5 through an on/off
operation of an applied voltage, and at the same time,
a selection voltage for selecting one of the two
apertures to be switched on is applied to the selection
electrodes 4A, 4B. That is, an on/off voltage is applied
to the selection electrodes 4A, 4B in synchronism
with the transmitted data, and in this case, a time-
divisional driving of ½ duty can be performed.
Therefore, the number of driving circuits used for the
data electrodes can be reduced to a half, and the cost of
the driving circuits can be greatly reduced.
Furthermore, at the oral hearing, held on October 10,
2001, the appellant’s attorney represented that the recited
“means for time-divisionally driving said data electrode and
said selection electrode” clause in claim 1 should be
interpreted in light of the disclosure in the specification
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007