Appeal No. 2002-0328
Application No. 09/250,324
with one another (brief, pages 10 & 11). Appellants further
indicate that claims 27 and 28 stand or fall together, claims 33
and 34 stand or fall together, claims 35 and 40 stand or fall
together, while each of claims 43 and 44 stand or fall alone
(brief, page 11). We also note that Appellants have, in the
arguments section of the brief, provided separate arguments for
each group, as required by 37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7) (July 1, 2000).
Therefore, we will consider Appellants’ claims as standing or
falling together as argued in the brief.
With respect to the rejection of claims 1-9, Appellants
point out that Wei does not disclose or suggest a picture element
made by patterning the display material and only teaches a
continuous layer of display material (brief, page 13; reply
brief, page 3). Appellants further point out that although Wei
shows a group of vias along the edges of the display device, such
structure cannot be modified to allow forming the vias through
the pixel structure since the display material of Wei is
continuous (brief, page 14; reply brief, page 3). Appellants
further argue that there is no teaching in Wei that would have
suggested modifying the reference to add vias through the pixel
structure and the patterned display material (brief, page 16).
In response to Appellants’ arguments, the Examiner argues
that the pixel structure in Wei is defined by the matrix of anode
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007