Appeal No. 2006-0323
Application 10/088,727
and a display surface, which is outside the projection unit, onto
which a real image is generated by the projection unit.
Representative claim 16 is reproduced as follows:
16. A display apparatus in a vehicle, comprising:
a projection unit arranged at least one of on a vehicle roof
and on an inside mirror of the vehicle; and
a display surface, which is outside the projection unit,
onto which a real image is generated by the projection unit.
The examiner relies on the following references:
Jost et al. (Jost) 4,919,517 Apr. 24, 1990
Hwang et al. (Hwang) 6,317,170 Nov. 13, 2001
Kleinschmidt 6,750,832 June 15, 2004
(filed June 21, 1999)
Claims 16-42 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). As
evidence of obviousness the examiner offers Jost in view of
Kleinschmidt with respect to claims 16-26 and 31-42, and Hwang is
added to this combination with respect to claims 27-30.
Rather than repeat the arguments of appellants 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
rejections. We have, likewise, reviewed and taken into
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007