1D Electronics 2012-2014

Product Information

Can I squeeze in one more trend? It’s HTML5 – the fifth iteration of the HTML standard – and it lets developers create richer, more interactive applications than ever. But getting chips qualified and designed into products, all the certification, Lohse, J., Winteler, S., & Wulf-Schnabel, J. (1998) ‘Collection targets for waste from electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE): The directorate general (DG XI) environment’, Nuclear safety and civil protection of the Commission of the European Communities. American scientists Theodore Fulton and Gerald Dolan of Bell Laboratories develop the first single-electron transistor.

Fakhredin, F., & Huisman, J. (2013) Analyzing End of Life LCD TV WEEE Flows in Europe. Paper presented at the EcoDesign 2013, Jeju Island, South Korea The correct approach, overall • The exercise must start with identifying the informed user and the existing design corpus. The overall impression is something produced on the informed user.The parties did not agree which way round these images should be understood. Apple submitted the curves are on the front of the unit curving away to a crisp edge at the rear. Samsung submitted the curves are on the rear side, curving towards a crisp edge at the front. If Samsung is correct the shape of the object overall is very similar to the Apple design. In my judgment Apple are right. Looking at the figures as a whole, to my eye figure 2 shows the view if one was looking at figure 3 from the left hand side as it appears above. The curves on the edges are visible in fig 1. If Samsung was right, fig 4 would be upside down. Although fig 4 is not complete in the images provided by the parties, enough of it is visible to see the point. Samsung's feature analysis schedule splits feature (v) into three parts but overall the schedule contends that feature (v) is present in items 6 (Gridpad), 7 (Krolopp), 10 (Showbox), 11, 12, 14, 16, 17 (Knight Ridder), 22, 24, 25 (Stevenson), 28 33, 34, 35 (AIPTEK), 36, 37, 40 (TC1000), 47, 48, 49 (Flatron). Items 11, 12, 33, 36 and 37 are not even close. I have rejected items 25 (Stevenson), 35 (AIPTEK) and 40 (TC1000) above. As for 6, 10, 14, 16, 17, 22, 47 and 48, to my eye although there are similarities, the sides of these various designs are different. The sides of 6 (Gridpad) either curve at both top and bottom faces or are roughly square at both faces. The sides of 10 (Showbox) are essentially flat with a sharp transition at the bottom meeting a gentle curve on the rear face. There is a similar arrangement at the top. There also appears to be a groove on the side near the top. Item 14 could be the same but it is hard to say. Item 16 looks similar but there is a groove at the bottom. Item 17 (Knight Ridder) has rounded sides but I do not see a crisp edge. Item 22 has a square side and a rounded side but not a side with a combination of the two. Item 47 is similar in a way but overall looks quite different as a result of all the other detailing. The side of item 48 is hard to make out but looks more complex than the Apple design. The overall impressions compared• I remind myself that the informed user is particularly observant, shows a relatively high degree of attention and in this case conducts a direct comparison between the products. Westphal, L., & Kuchta, K. (2013) ‘Permanent Magnets from Small Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment’, Paper presented at the Fourteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium, Sardinia, Italy.

ii) A flat transparent surface without any ornamentation covering the entire front face of the device up to the rim;

Wonder materials

I doubt any designer would design a hand held display device with flat sharp precisely 90° corners. There is a degree of corner rounding in all these designs and to that extent the design freedom is limited somewhat. However although some degree of rounding of corners is ubiquitous, the degree of rounding differs substantially from product to product. The considerations of volume, display size and ergonomics are trade offs which illustrate design choices the designer has to make. The appearance of the article plays an important part of that process of choice. Designers wanting a clean crisp appearance can choose quite sharp corners like the IBM ThinkPad. Designers can choose a highly rounded shape if they wish (see the Chumby below). A point arising on Ozolins concerns the rear of the housing. As far as the rear is concerned, figure 1 is more generalised than figure 9. Figure 1 has a rectangular region 320 marked on the rear unit 300. The document explains that: In paragraph 49 the Court of Appeal explained the legislative policy relating to "special grounds" and drew attention to certain features of this case which might be relevant. The policy is concerned with the problem that allowing the infringement proceedings to continue opens up the possibility of parallel proceedings on the same issue and a risk of inconsistent judgments on the same point between a Community design court and OHIM. The "special grounds" have to be sufficient to justify that risk. The features of this case the Court drew attention to are: first that these proceedings do not include validity therefore there is no risk of an inconsistent validity judgment; second that there is a need for a speedy determination of the claim, although whether that justifies allowing the counterclaim to proceed rather than only the claim may require thought; third, that the parties agree or do not object, although not determinative, is a relevant factor. Goonan, T. G. (2011) ‘Rare Earth Elements — End Use and Recyclability’, Reston, Virginia: U.S. Department of the Interior & U.S. Geological Survey. Morrison, W. M., & Tang, R. (2012) ‘China’s Rare Earth Industry and Export Regime: Economic and Trade Implications for the United States’, CRS Report for Congress: Congressional Research Service.