Ex Parte DEANE et al - Page 2




             Appeal No. 2001-1723                                                                                    
             Application No. 09/112,263                                                                              


                    Claims 1 and 10 are representative of the subject matter on appeal and read as follows:          
             1.     A substrate for carrying on an insulating surface thereof thin film circuit elements in a large  
             area electronic device, wherein the substrate comprises a thin sheet bonded to a layer of rigid,        
             cellular material.                                                                                      
             10.    A large area electronic device comprising a substrate on which thin film circuit elements are    
             carried, wherein the substrate comprises a substrate according to Claim 1, the thin film circuit        
             elements are carried on the surface of the thin glass sheet.                                            
                                                     PRIOR ART                                                       
                    In support of his rejections, the examiner relies on the following prior art references:         
             Schnable et al. (Schnable)1        4,196,232                  Apr.  1, 1980                             
             Hotaling (Hotaling ‘364)           5,221,364                  Jun. 22, 1993                             
             Hotaling (Hotaling ‘776)           5,358,776                  Oct. 25, 1994                             
             Webster’s II New Riverside University Dictionary2, The Riverside Publishing Company, page 533,          
             (1994).                                                                                                 
                    Appellants rely on the following reference:                                                      
             Hackh’s Chemical Dictionary3, Fourth Edition, McGraw-Hill Book Company, pp 298-299                      
             (unknown publication date).                                                                             

                                                     REJECTION                                                       


                    1 The examiner relies on this patent for the purposes of interpreting the term “glass” in the    
             claims on appeal.                                                                                       
                    2 The examiner relies on this dictionary for the purposes of interpreting the term “glass”       
             in the claims on appeal.                                                                                
                    3 The appellants rely on this dictionary for the purposes of interpreting the term “glass” in    
             the claims on appeal.                                                                                   
                                                         2                                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007