DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 9 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 9 and 19 recite the limitation "the rear shelf". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear as to what is being claimed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over William J. O’Neil (US 2,426,787 – hereinafter O’Neil) in view of William Fairchild (US 1,675,700 – hereinafter Fairchild).
Re Claim 1:
O’Neil discloses a ligature-resistant paper towel dispenser for dispensing folded-sheet paper towels comprising: a rear housing (10) having a mounting plane surface (by way of 17, 18) on a rear face (12) thereof for securing the ligature-resistant paper towel dispenser to a wall (see col. 2 lines 1-6); a front cover (11) rotatably coupled to the rear housing (10) (see col. 2 lines 11-14); a paper outlet (at 16 – upper entrance section) formed through one of the front cover (11), the rear housing (10), or a combination of the front cover (11) and the rear housing (10) and fed by a paper path (16) having a serpentine segment (gap formed by segments 25 and 28) along which the paper towels are guided and that is defined by curved projections (25, 28) that contact the paper towels on alternating faces as the paper towels are dispensed (as in one side contacts a first face of first paper towel, the other side contacts a next face of a second paper towel), wherein the paper path (16) terminates in an outlet slot (at 16 – lower exit section) disposed at a bottom of the towel dispenser for dispensing paper towels from a stack of folded-sheet paper towels; and a locking mechanism (34-36) for securing the front cover (11) to the rear housing (10) (see col. 3 line 65 to col. 4 line 4) (see Figs. 1-4), but if fails to specifically teach a serpentine segment along which the paper towels are guided and that is defined by curved projections that contact the paper towels on alternating faces as the paper towels are dispensed.
Fairchild teaches a serpentine segment (gap formed by segments 15, 16, 19, 21, and 22) along which paper towels are guided and that is defined by curved projections (16, 17, 19, 21, 22) that contact the paper towels on alternating faces as the paper towels are dispensed (as in each segment is capable of contacting one face of a sheet, while an adjacent section is capable of contacting another face of the sheet) (see Figs. 1-3). Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have been motivated to combine the teachings of O’Neil with that of Fairchild, to allow for dispensing of paper towels while preventing access to the rest of the package.
Re Claim 11:
O’Neil discloses a method of dispensing folded-sheet paper towels, while preventing formation or support of a ligature at the location of the dispensing, the method comprising: mounting a rear housing (10) of a ligature-resistant paper towel dispenser to a wall by securing a mounting plane surface (by way of 17, 18) provided at a rear face (12) of the rear housing (10) (see col. 2 lines 1-6); opening a front cover (11) rotatably attached to the rear housing (10) (see col. 2 lines 11-14); installing a stack of folded-sheet paper towels (29) within the ligature-resistant paper towel dispenser between the front cover (11) and the rear housing (10) (see Figs. 1 and 2); securing the front cover (11) to the rear housing (10) and over the stack of folded-sheet paper towels with a locking mechanism (34-36) (see col. 3 line 65 to col. 4 line 4); and dispensing paper towels from the stack of folded-sheet paper towels through a paper outlet (at 16 – upper entrance section) formed by one of the front cover (11), the rear housing (10), or a combination of the front cover (11) and the rear housing (10) by feeding the paper towels through a paper path (16) having a serpentine segment (gap formed by segments 25 and 28) along which the paper towels are guided and that is defined by curved projections (25, 28) that contact the paper towels on alternating faces as the paper towels are dispensed (as in one side contacts a first face of first paper towel, the other side contacts a next face of a second paper towel), wherein the paper path (16) terminates in an outlet slot (at 16 – lower exit section) disposed at a bottom of the towel dispenser for dispensing the paper towels see Figs. 1-4), but if fails to teach a serpentine segment along which the paper towels are guided and that is defined by curved projections that contact the paper towels on alternating faces as the paper towels are dispensed.
Fairchild teaches a serpentine segment (gap formed by segments 15, 16, 19, 21, and 22) along which paper towels are guided and that is defined by curved projections (16, 17, 19, 21, 22) that contact the paper towels on alternating faces as the paper towels are dispensed (as in each segment is capable of contacting one face of a sheet, while an adjacent section is capable of contacting another face of the sheet) (see Figs. 1-3). Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have been motivated to combine the teachings of O’Neil with that of Fairchild, to allow for dispensing of paper towels while preventing access to the rest of the package.
Claim(s) 2, 3, 12, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’Neil in view of Fairchild and further in view of Yutaka Horinchi (US 4,811,878 – hereinafter Horinchi).
Re Claims 2, 3, 12, and 13:
O’Neil in view of Fairchild discloses the device of claim 1, but fails to teach wherein the serpentine segment of the paper path defines a gap that is conformed to a thickness of one or two sheets of the paper towels, so that inward insertion of a ligature is prevented, while exit of single sheets of paper towels is permitted.
Horinchi further in view teaches wherein a serpentine segment of a paper path defines a gap (near 23) that is conformed to a thickness of one or two sheets of the paper towels (see Figs. 8 and 9), so that inward insertion of a ligature is prevented, while exit of single sheets of paper towels is permitted (see Figs. 8 and 9). (Examiner notes that Horinchi shows a restrictive opening confirmed to the size of at least one single sheet. Ligature that is too large would be prevented from entering through the opening which is conformed to the size of a single sheet) Re Claim 3: Horinchi further in view teaches wherein a paper path is inclined so that an exit of an outlet slot (at 23) is directed toward a rear face of a housing to prevent attempts to insert a ligature upward from a bottom of the housing (see Figs. 7 and 9). Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have been motivated to combine the teachings of O’Neil in view of Fairchild, with that of Horinchi, to prevent rollback or misplacement of a towel back into a housing where it would be difficult to reach, thus, also indicating that inserting ligature of a particular size would also be prevented/deterred.
Claim(s) 7 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’Neil in view of Fairchild and further in view of Stephen L. Phelps (US 6,520,372 B2 – hereinafter Phelps).
Re Claims 7 and 8:
O’Neil in view of Fairchild discloses the device of claim 1, but fails to teach wherein the ligature-resistant paper towel dispenser has a top projection having an exterior that is curved or inclined downward from an apex to prevent attachment of a ligature.
Phelps further in view teaches wherein a ligature-resistant paper towel dispenser has a top projection (24 – upper curved portion) having an exterior that is curved or inclined downward from an apex to prevent attachment of a ligature (see Fig. 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have been motivated to combine the teachings of O’Neil in view of Fairchild, with that of Phelps, to shape a device as seen fit by one of ordinary skill in the art, for Phelps teaches “the dispenser is not limited by its overall shape or appearance.. and may be incorporated into any type or configuration of folded sheet dispenser”. (see col. 1 lines 50-55)
Claim(s) 9, 10, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’Neil in view of Fairchild and Phelps, and further in view of Rodney Wilson (US 2014/0374433 A1 – hereinafter Wilson).
Re Claims 9, 10, and 20:
O’Neil in view of Fairchild and Phelps discloses the device of claim 8, but fails to teach wherein the front cover is rotatably coupled to the rear housing by a hinge formed by posts formed on inner surfaces of the front cover at opposite sides thereof, and a corresponding pair of slots formed in projections extending from an inner surface of the rear housing, whereby the front cover may be rotated and slid forward with respect to the rear housing to permit access to the rear shelf portion for inserting the stack of folded-sheet paper towels.
Wilson further in view teaches wherein a front cover (8) is rotatably coupled to a rear housing (5) by a hinge formed by posts (21) formed on inner surfaces of the front cover (8) at opposite sides (top/bottom) thereof, and a corresponding pair of slots (at 29) formed in projections (29) extending from an inner surface of the rear housing (5), whereby the front cover (8) may be rotated and slid forward (sliding against rear when meeting at closing point) with respect to the rear housing to permit access to a rear shelf portion for inserting the stack of folded-sheet paper towels. (see Figs. 1-5). Re Claim 10: Wilson further in view teaches wherein the front cover (8) and the rear housing (5) join at a blind seam extending around the top and along both sides of the housing to prevent insertion of a ligature when the front cover (8) is secured to the rear housing (5) (see Figs. 1-5). Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have been motivated to combine the teachings of O’Neil in view of Fairchild and Phelps, with that of Wilson to allow for opening and closing of a housing for refill purposes.
Claim(s) 17 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’Neil in view of Fairchild and Horinchi and further in view of Phelps.
Re Claims 17 and 18:
O’Neil in view of Fairchild and Horinchi discloses the device of claim 13, but fails to teach preventing attachment of a ligature around a top of the ligature-resistant paper towel dispenser by providing the ligature-resistant paper towel dispenser with a top projection having an exterior that is curved or inclined downward from an apex to prevent attachment of a ligature.
Phelps further in view teaches preventing attachment of a ligature around a top of the ligature-resistant paper towel dispenser by providing the ligature-resistant paper towel dispenser with a top projection (24 – upper curved portion) having an exterior that is curved or inclined downward from an apex to prevent attachment of a ligature (see Fig. 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have been motivated to combine the teachings of O’Neil in view of Fairchild and Horinchi, with that of Phelps, to shape a device as seen fit by one of ordinary skill in the art, for Phelps teaches “the dispenser is not limited by its overall shape or appearance.. and may be incorporated into any type or configuration of folded sheet dispenser”. (see col. 1 lines 50-55)
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’Neil in view of Fairchild, Horinchi, and Phelps, and further in view of Rodney Wilson (US 2014/0374433 A1 – hereinafter Wilson).
Re Claim 19:
O’Neil in view of Fairchild, Horinchi, and Phelps discloses the device of claim 8, but fails to teach wherein the front cover is rotatably coupled to the rear housing by a hinge formed by posts formed on inner surfaces of the front cover at opposite sides thereof, and a corresponding pair of slots formed in projections extending from an inner surface of the rear housing, and further comprising rotating and sliding the front cover forward with respect to the rear housing to access to the shelf to install the stack of folded-sheet paper towels.
Wilson further in view teaches wherein a front cover (8) is rotatably coupled to a rear housing (5) by a hinge formed by posts (21) formed on inner surfaces of the front cover (8) at opposite sides (top/bottom) thereof, and a corresponding pair of slots (at 29) formed in projections (29) extending from an inner surface of the rear housing (5), and further comprising rotating and sliding the front cover forward (sliding against rear when meeting at closing point) with respect to the rear housing to access the shelf to install the stack of folded-sheet paper towels. (see Figs. 1-5). Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have been motivated to combine the teachings of O’Neil in view of Fairchild, Horinchi, and Phelps, with that of Wilson to allow for opening and closing of a housing for refill purposes.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-6 and 14-16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KELVIN L RANDALL, JR. whose telephone number is (571)270-5373. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:00 am-5 pm est.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Gene Crawford can be reached at 571-272-6911. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/K.L.R/Examiner, Art Unit 3651
/GENE O CRAWFORD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3651
Prosecution Insights