Appeal No. 2003-1551
Application No. 09/550,713
the improvement comprising: an improved PBS-and-delay device
(PDD), said PDD comprising an integrally-formed means for
separating the first light beam into a reflected S polarized
light wave and a transmitted P polarized light wave, and for
creating a half wavelength delay between the reflected S
polarized light wave and the transmitted P polarized light wave.
The examiner relies on the following references:
Mitsutake et al. (Mitsutake) 5,446,510 Aug. 29, 1995
Marcellin-Dibon et al. 5,900,973 May 04, 1999
(filed May 23, 1996)
The admitted prior art disclosed by appellant.
Claims 1-10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). As
evidence of obviousness the examiner offers Mitsutake in view of
the admitted prior art with respect to claims 1-3, 5 and 7-10,
and the examiner adds Marcellin-Dibon to this combination with
respect to claims 4 and 6.
Rather than repeat the arguments of appellant or the
examiner, we make reference to the briefs and the answer for the
respective details thereof.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on
appeal, the rejections advanced by the examiner and the evidence
of obviousness relied upon by the examiner as support for the
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007