Appeal No. 1999-2450 Page 6
Application No. 08/812,222
I. Rejection over Tanamachi
The examiner asserts, "Tanamachi teaches a plasma display
device comprising color filters for providing color display
picture(see ... column 7, lines 26-28). It would have been
obvious to have modified Tanamachi's prior art with the
teaching of Tanamachi, so as to provide a color display."
(Examiner's Answer at 3.) The appellant argues, "there is no
teaching or suggestion in the reference that a group of pixel
elements representing different colors is associated with a
common data electrode ...." (Appeal Br. at 7.) The examiner
responds, “such limitation can not [sic] be found anywhere in
claims 1-4.” (Examiner’s Answer at 4.)
“‘[T]he main purpose of the examination, to which every
application is subjected, is to try to make sure that what
each claim defines is patentable. [T]he name of the game is
the claim ....’” In re Hiniker Co., 150 F.3d 1362, 1369,
47 USPQ2d 1523, 1529 (Fed. Cir. 1998)(quoting Giles S. Rich,
The Extent of the Protection and Interpretation of
Claims--American Perspectives, 21 Int'l Rev. Indus. Prop. &
Copyright L. 497, 499, 501 (1990)). Here, claims 1-4 specify
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007