Appeal No. 2006-1726
Application No. 09/725,849
consideration of all the pertinent evidence and arguments. “In
reviewing the [E]xaminer’s decision on appeal, the Board must
necessarily weigh all of the evidence and argument.” Oetiker,
977 F.2d at 1445, 24 USPQ2d at 1444. “[T]he Board must not only
assure that the requisite findings are made, based on evidence of
record, but must also explain the reasoning by which the findings
are deemed to support the agency’s conclusion.” In re Lee, 277
F.3d 1338, 1344, 61 USPQ2d 1430, 1434 (Fed. Cir. 2002).
With respect to dependent claims 2, 3, 6 and 7, Appellants
argue at page 10 of the Appeal Brief that Takahashi does not
teach that a first signal is applied to the pixels for charging
thereof during the beginning of a frame, and a second signal is
applied to the pixels for discharging thereof during the ending
of the frame. Appellants further argue that Miwa does not cure
these deficiencies.
We agree with the Appellants that the combination of
Takahashi and Miwa is not proper to render claims 2, 3, 6 and 7
obvious. As noted in the discussion above, the Takahashi
reference teaches providing a first selecting voltage as a
scanning signal in a first horizontal period to charge the liquid
10
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007