Appeal No. 2000-1201 Page 3
Application No. 08/817,825
modulation device being tuned to a predetermined
wavelength and transmitting a predetermined portion
of light energy which it receives at said
predetermined wavelength to said display screen,
wherein
each one of said plurality of image elements has
a number of said plurality of display elements equal
to a number of said plurality of illuminating light
beams, and wherein said spatio-chromatic separation
system is a holographic device receiving a beam
containing a plurality of primary beams and
transmitting each one of said plurality of primary
beams in a respective different direction.
(Appeal Br., App. I)
The prior art applied by the examiner in rejecting the
claims follows:
Loiseaux et al. (“Loiseaux”) 5,467,206 Nov.
14, 1995
(filed July 6, 1994)
Ichikawa 5,506,701 Apr. 9,
1996
(filed Jan. 28, 1994).
Claims 3 and 10-12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
obvious over Loiseaux in view of Ichikawa.
OPINION
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007