Appeal No. 2000-1457 Page 5
Application No. 08/739,888
The appellants argue that the applied prior art does not
suggest the claimed subject matter. We agree.
All the claims under appeal require a rod to have one
smooth continuous curve between first and second end portions
received and fixed in fittings supported on a pair of parallel
walls located at opposite ends of a bath tub. However, these
limitations are not suggested by the applied prior art. In
that regard, while Perrotta does teach a curved shower curtain
bar 12 mounted by end supports (see, for example Figure 2),
Perrotta does not teach or suggest using a curved shower
curtain bar mounted by end supports onto a pair of parallel
walls located at opposite ends of a bath tub. In fact,
Perrotta teaches in Figure 3 a straight shower curtain bar 12
mounted by end supports onto a pair of parallel walls located
at opposite ends of a bath tub. Glutting, Sr. also teaches in
Figure 1 a straight shower curtain rod 4 mounted by end
supports onto a pair of parallel walls located at opposite
ends of a bath tub. Goché teaches in Figures 1-2 a shower
curtain rod 25 mounted by end supports onto a pair of parallel
walls located at opposite ends of a bath tub. Goché's shower
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007