Appeal No. 2001-1889
Application No. 09/222,453
BACKGROUND
The invention is directed to a spatial light modulator package, whereby a window
is glued to a window frame to avoid distortion of the glass that may occur, according to
appellants, with the prior art method of heat bonding. Claim 10 is reproduced below.
10. A micromechanical package lid comprising:
a glass window; and
a metal window frame glued to said glass window.
The examiner relies on the following references:
Poradish et al. (Poradish) 5,293,511 Mar. 8, 1994
Yamada et al. (Yamada) 5,508,834 Apr. 16, 1996
Claims 1-17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as being anticipated by
Poradish.
Claim 18 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Poradish and Yamada.
We refer to the Final Rejection (Paper No. 6) and the Examiner’s Answer1 (Paper
No. 14) for a statement of the examiner's position and to the Brief (Paper No. 10) and
the Reply Brief (Paper No. 12) for appellants’ position with respect to the claims which
stand rejected.
1 The paper is styled “Supplemental Examiner’s Answer,” but is a substitute for an earlier paper
(Paper No. 11).
-2-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007