Appeal No. 2004-2288
Application No. 10/084,723
from and flexible than substrate areas where semiconductor
devices are located.1 Thus, for the reasons stated in the Brief,
Reply Brief and above, we reverse each of the foregoing
rejections.2
REVERSED
CHUNG K. PAK )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
CHARLES F. WARREN ) APPEALS AND
Administrative Patent Judge ) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
PETER F. KRATZ )
Administrative Patent Judge )
CKP:hh
1 The examiner has not relied on Shanks to teach the
location of the claimed pixel electrode.
2 We need not discuss the literature evidence relied upon by
the appellant since the specification provides the meaning of the
“pixel electrode” recited in claims 1 and 2.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007