Appeal No. 2001-2370 Page 5
Application No. 09/109,403
shadow mask, not the frame or rail to which the shadow mask is
attached. We observe that both appellant’s specification (page
5) and Seo (page 5) define the shadow mask and frame as separate
elements. Because the "point where wires 21 are mounted" is on
the frame and not on the shadow mask of Seo, we find that Seo
does not anticipate the claims before us on appeal, which require
that the reference points be on the shadow mask.
In addition, each of claims 1, 3, and 5-9 recite that “the
shadow mask being provided with at least one reference portion
for determining the position at which the vibration attenuation
device is installed.” Because Seo uses oblique lines at an angle
of inclination 2 or at right angles to the horizontal axis to
position the wires (figures (3A) and 6(A), and page 6) we do not
agree with the examiner that the point where the wires are
connected to be reference portions "for determining the position
at which the vibration attenuation device is installed" as
recited in independent claims 1, 3, and 5-9." Accordingly, we
cannot sustain the anticipation rejection of the claims as
advanced by the examiner. We therefore reverse the rejection of
claims 1, 3, 5-10 and 14 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007