Appeal No. 2003-1509
Application 09/853,575
directed to Appeldorn '876. Thus, as pointed out by appellants'
counsel at the oral hearing, the combination of Crossland and
Appeldorn '876 has already been briefed (although it may not be
apparent from the brief). Nevertheless, we are not dissuaded
from making a new ground of rejection by appellants' arguments.
The fact that Crossland does not disclose any other kind of
backing layer 17 for the LCD is not persuasive of nonobviousness
because the rejection is based on the combination with
Appeldorn '876 which teaches a notched optical fiber light source
for an LCD. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been
motivated to substitute the substantially parallel array 46 of
notched optical fibers 48 of Appeldorn '876 for the backing
layer 17 of Crossland since Appeldorn '876 expressly teaches that
the optical fiber array can be used as an illumination source for
an LCD. The fact that Appeldorn '876 does not disclose directing
light from the notched optical fibers toward a luminescent
material is not persuasive of nonobviousness because the
rejection is based on the combination of Crossland which teaches
using a phosphor material at the viewing side of the LC shutter
to improve the viewing angle. One of ordinary skill in the art
would have been motivated to provide phosphors at the viewing
side of the LC shutters in Appeldorn '876 to increase the viewing
angle in view of Crossland. Thus, we find motivation in both
references to make the proposed combination.
- 17 -
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007