Appeal No. 2000-1649
Application No. 08/951,077
connected by flat chamfer portions. Absent any curved
surfaces whatsoever in this cross-sectional profile, the
"softly rounded" and "smoothly curving" limitations of claim 1
are clearly not present in the cross-sectional profile in any
(every) plane perpendicular to the rear mounting surface of
the dispenser outer housing, as required by claim 1, and
therefore claim 1 is not anticipated by De Luca.
Claim 15, the other independent claim included in this
rejection, differs from claim 1 only in that it recites
dispensing a "washroom product" rather than "paper towels,"
and thus is likewise not anticipated by De Luca.
Accordingly, rejection (1) will not be sustained as to
claims 1 and 15, nor, it follows, as to dependent claims 5,
10, 19 and 20.
Rejection (2)
The examiner takes the position that it would have been
obvious in view of De Luca to modify the Voss dispenser "so as
to employ a softly rounded and smoothly curving dispensing
frame [sic: outer housing?]" (answer, page 4). We will not
sustain this rejection, since even if Voss and De Luca were
combined as the examiner proposes, the resulting structure
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007