Appeal No. 2000-1201 Page 8 Application No. 08/817,825 tuned color filter for the reference’s filter. His broad, conclusory statement of “further purify[ing] the illuminating light to the desired pixels to thereby provide highly saturated pixel colors,” standing alone, is not evidence. Relying on Loiseaux merely to teach that holography “is a common way to form . . . diffractive structures,” (Final Rejection at 3), the examiner fails to allege, let alone show, that the secondary reference cures the defect of the primary reference. Absent evidence that the Loiseaux’s display device would benefit from a tuned color filter, we are not persuaded of that teachings from the prior art would have suggested combining the substitution. Therefore, we reverse the rejection of claims 3 and 10-12 as obvious over Loiseaux in view of Loiseaux. CONCLUSION In summary, the rejection of claims 3 and 10-12 under § 103(a) is reversed.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007