Ex Parte Baaijens et al - Page 2



          Appeal No. 2005-2304                                                        
          Application No. 10/127,555                                                  

          display tube manufactured by the method.  Claim 1 is                        
          illustrative:                                                               
               1. A method of producing a color display tube (1) with a               
          display window (3) and a color selection electrode (12)                     
          comprising a shadow mask (13) and a frame (14), which method                
          comprises the process steps of forming the shadow mask (13) from            
          an apertured sheet, blackening said shadow mask (13) in a furnace           
          at a temperature of about at least 600°C and coupling the shadow            
          mask (13) to the frame (14) so as to form the color selection               
          electrode (12) which is suspended from the display window (3),              
          characterized in that, after the process step of blackening, the            
          shadow mask (13) is cooled down at a cooling rate substantially             
          higher than 50°C/min in order to obtain a significant decrease in           
          thermal expansion coefficient of the shadow mask (13).                      
                                    THE REFERENCE                                     
          Ryoji1                      10-130722                May 19, 1998           
               (Japanese patent application)                                          
                                    THE REJECTION                                     
               Claims 1-9 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being               
          unpatentable over Ryoji.                                                    
                                       OPINION                                        
               We affirm the aforementioned rejection.                                
               The appellants state that the claims stand or fall in two              
          groups: 1) claims 1 and 4-9, and 2) claims 2 and 3.  We therefore           
          limit our discussion to one claim in each group, i.e., claims 1             

               1 Citations herein to Ryoji are to the English translation             
          thereof which is of record.                                                 
                                         -2-                                          




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007