Appeal 2006-2258
Application 10/170,116
Yamato (Answer 8). Based on the totality of the record, we AFFIRM all
rejections on appeal based on § 103(a) essentially for the reasons stated in
the Answer, as well as those reasons set forth below. We REVERSE the
rejection on appeal based on § 102(b). Therefore the decision of the
Examiner is AFFIRMED.
OPINION
A. The Rejection under § 102(b)
The Examiner finds that Haven describes a method of manufacturing
a color filter on a luminescent screen assembly for a color cathode ray tube,
including the steps of providing a faceplate panel having a patterned light
absorbing matrix which defines a first, second, and third set of fields,
forming a photosensitive blocking layer over the second and third set of
fields, applying a first color filter (blue phosphor) layer to the first set of
fields, and removing the photosensitive blocking layer (Answer 3,
specifically citing column and line in Haven for each step as required for
claims 1 and 2 on appeal).
Appellant argues that Haven does not describe or suggest a method in
which the color filter is formed between the faceplate panel and the color
emitting phosphors (Br. 6). The Examiner states that this limitation is not
required by the claims in this rejection (Answer 4 and 8). The Examiner
considers the materials of Haven to be red, green and blue, even if they are
phosphors, but the Examiner finds that these phosphors read on “color
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007