Appeal No. 2001-2370 Page 2
Application No. 09/109,403
electron guns by colors, and a vibration attenuation device
disposed in a space between the pores, the shadow mask being
provided with at least one reference portion for determining the
position at which the vibration attenuation device is installed,
wherein the reference portion differs in shape or size from the
pores of the shadow mask.
The prior art reference of record relied upon by the
examiner in rejecting the appealed claims is:
Seo1 KR 94-11640 Dec. 22, 1994
Claims 1, 3, 5-10 and 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) as being anticipated by Seo.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by
the examiner and appellant regarding the above-noted rejection,
we make reference to the answer (Paper No. 19, mailed May 22,
2001) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the
rejection, and to the brief (Paper No. 18, filed March 30, 2001)
for appellant's arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to appellant's specification and claims, to
1 We rely upon the translation provided by the USPTO, a copy of which is
attached to this decision. Although the translation refers to the inventor
as "So," we observe that the document appears to be the same document referred
to as "Seo" by appellant and the examiner.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007