Appeal No. 98-1252 Page 16
Application No. 08/642,184
a dental floss dispenser on the second part 14 of the two-part
cap means of Miles in order to achieve Grussmark's expressly
stated advantage of providing a dental product that reminds a
user to floss, as well as brush, their teeth (see column 1,
lines 37 and 38). In view of the significant extent of the
planar bottom wall 25 of Grussmark's dental floss dispenser, we
are of the opinion that there is a sound basis for the
examiner's conclusion that the bottom wall in the combination
toothpaste container and dental floss holder of Miles, as
modified by Grussmark, would inherently "adapt" the modified
device to stand in an upright position (see final rejection,
pages 8 and 9). This being the case, we will sustain the
rejection of claim 24 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 based on the
combined teachings of Miles and Grussmark.
In summary:
The rejection of claims 1, 2 and 23 under 35 U.S.C. § 103
based on the combined teachings of Miles, Grussmark and Paulson
is reversed.
The rejection of 12, 15, 17 and 22 under 35 U.S.C. § 103
based on the combined teachings of Cordero and White is
affirmed.
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007