Appeal No. 2005-2287
Application No. 09/767,588
Accordingly, in appellants opinion, the combination of Saito
and Nakanowatari cannot suggest the subject matter of instant
claim 6.
The examiner recognized that Saito lacks a teaching or
suggestion of bending the seal material at an acute angle to form
an injection hole, but relied on Nakanowatari’s Figure 3 to show
the sealing material bent at an angle to form an injection hole.
It is the examiner’s contention that the hole in Nakanowatari is
formed by cutting away the seal material at an acute angle,
viewed as the “outside angle” (answer-page 8). Therefore,
concludes the examiner, “the seal material that seals the
injection port is also formed at an acute angle” (answer-page 8).
The examiner found that it would have been obvious “to adapt
the specific sealing configuration that is cut at an acute angle
to enable the injection hole to come close to the bottom of the
tank of the liquid crystal, thereby enabling effective use of an
expensive liquid crystal (col. 2, lines 12-26)” (answer-page 8).
Independent claim 6 calls for “bending said sealing material
at an acute angle when said injection hole is formed.” It does
not mention what “acute” is relative to. Whenever an obtuse
angle is formed, there is also an acute angle formed because the
two angles are supplementary. Since there is nothing to relate
-7-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007