my answer for past exam (QE2012 paper B)

1. Dear Tom,
Thank you for your letter.
Please be advised that “AAPA” stands for “Applicant's Admitted Prior
Art”. You can find the “document” in paragraph [007] of your own SG
application No. 1234567.
Also D1 was published on August 16, 2007, which is earlier than the
filing date of present application, i.e. 1 May 2010. Therefore D1 cannot
be disregarded regardless of availability in the market.
I understand you found another prior art, which was published by
EasyDispense in February 2010. Although it is not cited by the
examiner, it is necessary to overcome the prior art. Otherwise your
patent will be opposed because of the prior art in the future.
Please find the enclosed draft amendment of claims. To clarify the
difference between present application and prior arts, the number of
nozzle is specified to only one. D1 and EasyDispense have more than 1
nozzles, therefore the above amendment will clarify the difference. Also,
the feature “pre-dispensing contact between component in each
compartment is avoided” is added into the new claim 1. This feature will
be useful to distinguish present application from AAPA. In summary, the
draft amended claim will cover the first and second embodiment and will
overcome the rejection from the examiner.
Also a claim which have a feature of “the divided, hinged cap” is added
to the new claim set. Since none of prior arts disclose the feature, new
claim will be new and have inventive steps.
Should you have any further queries, please feel free to contact me. I
look forward to receiving your instruction.
Regards, Mike

2. We refer to Written Opinion dated 1 September 2012 for Singapore Patent Application
number 1234567.
Amendment
“One or more nozzles” in claim 1 is amended to “a nozzle”. Support for this amendment
can be found for example in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2.
Also, the feature “pre-dispensing contact between component in each compartment is
avoided” is added to claim 1. Support for this amendment can be found in paragraph 0020.
“A lower end” and “an upper end” are amended to “one end” and “the other end” to clarify
the expression.
Novelty
D1 does not disclose the feature “a first compartment in fluid communication with the
nozzle and a second compartment in fluid communication with the nozzle” in new claim 1.
Therefore new claim 1 is novel over D1.
Also, AAPA does not disclosed the feature “pre-dispensing contact between component in
each compartment is avoided” in new claim 1. Therefore new claim 1 is novel over AAPA.
Inventiveness
According to D1, a single container having multiple openings for dispensing contents may
be desirable. Thus multiple openings are required for D1. Therefore a person skilled in the
art will not reach all the features of new claims 1 based on D1.
Also, for AAPA, rapturing is required. Thus pre-dispensing contact between component in
each compartment is not avoided in AAPA. Therefore a person skilled in the art will not
reach all the features of new claim 1 based on AAPA.
Since D1 and AAPA are based on totally different concept, it is not obvious to combine D1
and AAPA for a person skilled in the art. Even if the person skilled in the art could combine
D1 and AAPA, he/she cannot reach all the features of new claim 1 because there is no
teaching regarding combination of D1 and AAPA.
In light of the above discussion, new claim 1 is inventive over D1 and AAPA. This
argument will apply to the other claims in this application.
Clarity objections
There terms “upper end” and “lower end” are amended. Applicant believes all new claims
are clear.

3. Claims
1. A dispenser comprising:
a main body; and
one or more nozzles formed on the main body; wherein
the main body comprises a first compartment in fluid communication with one of the at
least one nozzles and a second compartment in fluid communication with one of the at
least one nozzles.
a nozzle formed on the main body; wherein
the main body comprises a first compartment and a second compartment, separating
fluids in the main body;
the first and second compartments are in fluid communication with the nozzle; and
pre-dispensing contact between component in each compartment is avoided.
2. The dispenser of claim 1, wherein the first compartment is disposed above the second
compartment.
3. The dispenser of claim 2, comprising one nozzle, and wherein the first and second
compartments are in fluid communication with said one nozzle.
4. The dispenser of claims 2 or 3, wherein the main body comprises a channel in fluid
communication with the second compartment at one end thereof, and in fluid
communication with said one nozzle at another end thereof.
5. The dispenser of claim 4, wherein the channel extends at least to a lower one end of
said one nozzle.
6. The dispenser of claim 5, wherein the channel extends substantially to an upper the
other end of said one nozzle.
7. The dispenser of claim 1, wherein the first and second compartments are disposed
side- by-side.
8. The dispenser of claim 7, comprising two nozzles disposed at the same end of the main
body, and the first and second compartments are in fluid communication with the first and
second nozzles.
9. The dispenser of claim 7, comprising one nozzle, wherein the first and second
compartments are in fluid communication with said one nozzle.
10. The dispenser of claim 9, comprising a dividing wall disposed between the first and
second compartments, wherein the dividing wall extends at least to a lower one end of
said one nozzle.
11. The dispenser of claim 10, wherein the dividing wall extends substantially to an upper
the other end of said one nozzle.

4. 12. The dispenser of claim 1, wherein a divided, hinged cap is provided for the nozzle,
which is disposed to selectively allow dispensing of fluid from substantially only one of the
compartments, or from both the first and second compartments by selectively opening
halves of the flap of the cap.