DETAILED ACTION
EXAMINER’S REMARKS
Examiner notes that the Patent Board affirmed the previous rejection with a new grounds of rejection in the Patent Board decision rendered July 15, 2025. Applicant submitted a new claim amendment on September 14, 2025 with newly presented limitations. The new ground of rejection raised by the Patent Board in the decision rendered July 15, 2025 does not reopen prosecution except as to that subject matter to which the new rejection was applied. The examiner does not consider the amendment filed September 14, 2025 to overcome the new rejections presented below, which was necessitated by amendment. The rejection below has been made final (MPEP § 1214.01.I.).
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 1 and 3-19 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “a collar made separate from and not integral with any frame” in line 8. It is unclear what constitutes “any frame.” Additionally, it is unclear if this limitation requires the collar to be separate from any frame. Furthermore, there is insufficient antecedent basis for “any frame.”
Claim 12 recites the limitation “a collar made separate from and not integral with any frame” in line 8. It is unclear what constitutes “any frame.” Additionally, it is unclear if this limitation requires the collar to be separate from any frame. Furthermore, there is insufficient antecedent basis for “any frame.”
Claim 15 recites the limitation “a collar made separate from and not integral with any frame” in line 9. It is unclear what constitutes “any frame.” Additionally, it is unclear if this limitation requires the collar to be separate from any frame. Furthermore, there is insufficient antecedent basis for “any frame.”
Clarification is required.
Claims 3-11, 13-14, and 16-19 are rejected as being dependent on a rejected base claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 of this title, 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 3-5, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rivera US 2013/0139699 in view of Wahhas US 2014/0342058 and Zweed US 2014/0170281.
Regarding Claim 1, Rivera discloses a beverage filter system comprising a basket portion (filter paper cup 40’ or 40”) formed entirely from a water permeable and disposable material of a paper based material (‘699, FIG. 44A) (‘699, Paragraphs [0116]-[0118] and [0243]). The basket portion (filter paper cup 40’ or 40”) has a ring shaped opening thereto (circular opening onto which a circular coffee holder lid 32f is disposed thereon) (‘699, Paragraph [0242]). Filter paper cup 40” that reads on the claimed basket portion in FIG. 44A is depicted as a solid object without any additional structure and also does not have an outer container or assembly with a bottom or sidewall. Therefore, Rivera teaches a basket portion (filter paper cup 40’ or 40”) excludes any impermeable materials for structure or support and further excludes an outer container or assembly with a bottom or a sidewall. Rivera also discloses a collar (rim 40c) being attached directly to and disposed about an outer periphery of the ring shaped opening of the basket portion (filter paper cup 40’ or 40”) (‘699, FIG. 44A) (‘699, Paragraphs [0211], [0244], and [0248]), a separate reusable coffee filter holder (coffee holder base 31d), and a removable and replaceable filter holder cap (coffee holder lid 32f) disposed over the coffee filter holder (coffee holder base 31d) (‘699, Paragraph [0243]) wherein the collar (rim 40c) is in direct contact with an undersurface of the filter holder cap (coffee holder lid 32f) and the basket portion (filter paper cup 40’ or 40”) is disposed directly adjacent the reusable coffee filter holder (coffee holder base 31d) without any intermediate structure therebetween (‘699, FIGS. 44B-44C) (‘699, Paragraph [0244]). The collar (rim 40c) is made of a disposable material (‘699, Paragraph [0243]).
PNG
media_image1.png
739
632
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Rivera is silent regarding the paper based material of the basket portion (filter paper cup 40’ or 40”) to be made of a biodegradable and compostable paper material. Rivera is also silent regarding the collar being formed from a resilient, biodegradable, and compostable material.
Wahhas discloses a beverage filter system comprising a basket portion (filter 12) (‘058, Paragraph [0014]) formed entirely from a water permeable, disposable (recyclable), biodegradable, and compostable paper based material (‘058, Paragraphs [0012]-[0013]), the basket portion (filter 12) having a ring shaped opening thereto and a collar (edge of filter 12 that is fused between rim of cup 10 and lid 14) attached directly to and disposed about an outer periphery of the ring shaped opening of the basket portion (filter 12) (‘058, FIG. 3) (‘058, Paragraphs [0015]-[0016]).
Both Rivera and Wahhas are directed towards the same field of endeavor of beverage filter systems comprising a basket portion formed entirely from a water permeable and disposable paper based material. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the generic paper based basket portion filter of Rivera and construct the basket portion filter out of a paper based material that is biodegradable and compostable as taught by Wahhas in order to make the beverage filter system to be environmentally friendly (‘058, Paragraph [0004]) and more eco-friendly than traditional K-cups and to make the beverage filter system completely recyclable (‘058, Paragraph [0013]).
Further regarding Claim 1, Rivera modified with Wahhas is silent regarding the collar being formed from a resilient material.
Zweed discloses a beverage filter system comprising a collar (sealing element 305) formed from a resilient, compostable material (paper) (‘281, FIG. 4) (‘281, Paragraph [0041]).
PNG
media_image2.png
882
1456
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Both modified Rivera and Zweed are directed towards the same field of endeavor of beverage filter systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the beverage filter system of modified Rivera and construct the collar from a resilient and compostable material of paper as taught by Zweed since the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination in view of Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945) (MPEP § 2144.07). Zweed teaches that there was known utility in the beverage filter art to construct a collar of a basket portion formed of paper from a resilient and biodegradable material as taught by in order to allow the collar to fit better and/or more firmly onto a clamping edge of a capsule/coffee filter holder (‘281, Paragraph [0041]).
Further regarding Claim 1, it is noted that the limitations “a collar made separate from and not integral with any frame” are rejected as being indefinite under 35 USC 112(b) as enumerated above. Insofar as it can be understood that applicant actually meant to recite a collar made separate from and directly attached to and disposed about an outer periphery of the ring shaped opening of the basket portion, if it were considered desirable for any reason to obtain access to the collar to which the basket portion is applied, it would be obvious to make the collar removable for that purpose in view of In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961) (MPEP § 2144.04.V.C.). Furthermore, limitations with respect to constructing the collar separate from the basket portion are product by process limitations. Even though product by process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product by process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process in view of In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (MPEP § 2113.I.).
Regarding Claim 3, Rivera modified with Wahhas and Zweed is silent regarding the collar and the basket portion being formed as an integral unit. However, the use of a one piece construction instead of the structure disclosed in AAPA would be merely a matter of obvious engineering choice."); but see Schenck v. Nortron Corp., 713 F.2d 782, 218 USPQ 698 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (MPEP § 2144.04.V.B.).
Regarding Claims 3-4, the recitations of the collar and the basket portion being formed either as an integral unit or being formed separately and joined together are product by process limitations. “[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. It the product in the product by process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (MPEP § 2113.I.).
Regarding Claim 5, Rivera discloses an embodiment wherein a tab (extended rim 40c’) extends from the disposable beverage filter (‘699, FIGS. 49A-49B) (‘699, Paragraph [0248]).
Regarding Claim 11, Rivera discloses a cover (lid 40d) disposed over the ring shaped opening wherein the cover (lid 40d) seals product inside and is capable of being pierced to admit a heated liquid (heated water 19a) (‘699, Paragraph [0243]).
PNG
media_image3.png
730
686
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rivera US 2013/0139699 in view of Wahhas US 2014/0342058 and Zweed US 2014/0170281 as applied to claim 5 above in further view of Hermanowski et al. US 2013/0164414.
Regarding Claim 6, Rivera modified with Wahhas and Zweed is silent regarding the tab extending from an inner edge of the collar and extending into the ring shaped opening.
Hermanowski et al. discloses a disposable beverage filter comprising a basket portion (filter package 200) formed form a water permeable material having a ring-shaped opening thereto (‘414, FIG. 4) ('414, Paragraph [0022]). The basket portion (filter package 200) excludes any impermeable materials for structure and excludes an outer container or assembly with a bottom or sidewall (‘414, FIG. 4). A separate and reusable coffee filter holder (beverage filter chamber 500a) is unattached to the basket portion (filter package 200). A removable and replaceable filter holder cap (beverage chamber top seal 510) is disposed to cover the coffee filter holder (beverage filter chamber 500a) (‘414, FIG. 4) ('414, Paragraphs [0008] and [0023]). Hermanowski et al. further discloses a tab (tab 210a) extending from the disposable beverage filter (‘414, FIG. 4) to facilitate easy loading and unloading of the filter into a beverage maker (‘414, Paragraph [0022]). Although Hermanowski does not explicitly teach the tab extending from an inner edge of the collar and extending into the ring shaped opening, the configuration of the claimed tab is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed tab was significant (MPEP § 2144.04.IV.B.). The disposition of the claimed tab does not provide a non-obvious functional difference over the prior art since Hermanowski et al. teaches incorporating a filter tab to facilitate loading and unloading of the tab, which would occur regardless of the specific orientation of the tab. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the filter of Sweeney et al. and provide a tab extending from the disposable beverage filter as taught by Hermanowski et al. in order to facilitate easy loading and unloading of the filter into a beverage maker ('414, Paragraph [0022]), which would occur regardless of the specific orientation of the tab.
PNG
media_image4.png
895
1212
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rivera US 2013/0139699 in view of Wahhas US 2014/0342058 and Zweed US 2014/0170281 as applied to claim 1 above in further view of Beaulieu et al. US 2010/0303964.
Regarding Claim 7, Rivera modified with Wahhas and Zweed is silent regarding the basket portion including at least two different materials forming different portions of the basket portion.
Beaulieu et al. discloses a disposable beverage filter comprising a basket portion (filter 30) formed from a water permeable material having a ring shaped opening thereto (‘964, FIG. 2) ('964, Paragraph [0034]). Beaulieu et al. further discloses the basket portion (filter 30) including at least two different materials (coarse filter portion) (fine filter portion) (two or more separate components) forming different portions of the basket portion. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the filter basket portion of modified Rivera and include at least two different materials forming different portions of the basket portion as taught by Beaulieu et al. in order to initially filter out relatively large particles and then filter relatively smaller particles ('964, Paragraph [0034]).
Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rivera US 2013/0139699 in view of Wahhas US 2014/0342058 and Zweed US 2014/0170281 as applied to claim 1 above in further view of Cai US 2006/0280841.
Regarding Claims 8 and 10, Rivera modified with Wahhas and Zweed is silent regarding the basket portion including at least a first chamber and a second chamber or three or more chambers.
Cai discloses a disposable beverage filter (bottom filter 102) formed from a water permeable material i.e. paper (‘841, Paragraph [0036]). Cai further discloses a drink cartridge that includes three or more chambers (‘841, bottom chamber 11a, top chamber 11b, round protruded chamber 119) (‘841, FIG. 3) (‘841, Paragraph [0033]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the beverage filter system of modified Rivera and provide a drink cartridge that includes three or more chambers as taught by Cai in order to separate beverage making components, i.e. first flavor containing materials 12a e.g. milk powder or granules, creamer, chocolate, cocoa, sugar, proteins, fat, vitamins, or other appropriate soluble solids from second flavor containing materials 12b e.g. coffee grounds (‘841, Paragraph [0030]) from a chamber (round protruded chamber 119) that connects to a drink apparatus (‘841, Paragraph [0033]), until ready for use.
Regarding Claim 9, Rivera modified with Wahhas, Zweed, and Cai discloses a pre-packaged product (first flavor containing materials 12a, second flavor containing materials 12b) in the chambers (‘841, Paragraph [0030]).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rivera US 2013/0139699 in view of Wahhas US 2014/0342058, Zweed US 2014/0170281, and Hermanowski et al. US 2013/0164414.
Regarding Claim 12, Rivera discloses a beverage filter system comprising a basket portion (filter paper cup 40’ or 40”) formed entirely from a water permeable and disposable material of a paper based material (‘699, FIG. 44A) (‘699, Paragraphs [0116]-[0118] and [0243]). The basket portion (filter paper cup 40’ or 40”) has a ring shaped opening thereto (circular opening onto which a circular coffee holder lid 32f is disposed thereon) (‘699, Paragraph [0242]). Filter paper cup 40” that reads on the claimed basket portion in FIG. 44A is depicted as a solid object without any additional structure and also does not have an outer container or assembly with a bottom or sidewall. Therefore, Rivera teaches a basket portion (filter paper cup 40’ or 40”) excludes any impermeable materials for structure or support and further excludes an outer container or assembly with a bottom or a sidewall. Rivera also discloses a collar (rim 40c) being attached directly to and disposed about an outer periphery of the ring shaped opening of the basket portion (filter paper cup 40’ or 40”) (‘699, FIG. 44A) (‘699, Paragraphs [0211], [0244], and [0248]), a separate reusable coffee filter holder (coffee holder base 31d), and a removable and replaceable filter holder cap (coffee holder lid 32f) disposed over the coffee filter holder (coffee holder base 31d) (‘699, Paragraph [0243]) wherein the collar (rim 40c) is in direct contact with an undersurface of the filter holder cap (coffee holder lid 32f) and the basket portion (filter paper cup 40’ or 40”) is disposed directly adjacent the reusable coffee filter holder (coffee holder base 31d) without any intermediate structure therebetween (‘699, FIGS. 44B-44C) (‘699, Paragraph [0244]). The collar (rim 40c) is made of a disposable material (‘699, Paragraph [0243]). Rivera also discloses an embodiment wherein a tab (extended rim 40c’) extends from the disposable beverage filter (‘699, FIG. 49A) (‘699, Paragraph [0248]).
Rivera is silent regarding the paper based material of the basket portion (filter paper cup 40’ or 40”) to be made of a biodegradable and compostable paper material. Rivera is also silent regarding the collar being formed from a resilient, biodegradable, and compostable material and the tab extending from the disposable beverage filter from an inner edge of the collar and extending into the ring shaped opening.
Wahhas discloses a beverage filter system comprising a basket portion (filter 12) (‘058, Paragraph [0014]) formed entirely from a water permeable, disposable (recyclable), biodegradable, and compostable paper based material (‘058, Paragraphs [0012]-[0013]), the basket portion (filter 12) having a ring shaped opening thereto and a collar (edge of filter 12 that is fused between rim of cup 10 and lid 14) attached directly to and disposed about an outer periphery of the ring shaped opening of the basket portion (filter 12) (‘058, FIG. 3) (‘058, Paragraphs [0015]-[0016]).
Both Rivera and Wahhas are directed towards the same field of endeavor of beverage filter systems comprising a basket portion formed entirely from a water permeable and disposable paper based material. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the generic paper based basket portion filter of Rivera and construct the basket portion filter out of a paper based material that is biodegradable and compostable as taught by Wahhas in order to make the beverage filter system to be environmentally friendly (‘058, Paragraph [0004]) and more eco-friendly than traditional K-cups and to make the beverage filter system completely recyclable (‘058, Paragraph [0013]).
Further regarding Claim 12, Rivera modified with Wahhas is silent regarding the collar being formed from a resilient material and the tab extending from an inner edge of the collar and extending into the ring shaped opening.
Zweed discloses a beverage filter system comprising a collar (sealing element 305) formed from a resilient, compostable material (paper) (‘281, FIG. 4) (‘281, Paragraph [0041]).
Both modified Rivera and Zweed are directed towards the same field of endeavor of beverage filter systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the beverage filter system of modified Rivera and construct the collar from a resilient and compostable material of paper as taught by Zweed since the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination in view of Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945) (MPEP § 2144.07). Zweed teaches that there was known utility in the beverage filter art to construct a collar of a basket portion formed of paper from a resilient and biodegradable material as taught by in order to allow the collar to fit better and/or more firmly onto a clamping edge of a capsule/coffee filter holder (‘281, Paragraph [0041]).
Further regarding Claim 12, Rivera modified with Wahhas and Zweed is silent regarding the tab extending from an inner edge of the collar and extending into the ring shaped opening.
Hermanowski et al. discloses a disposable beverage filter comprising a basket portion (filter package 200) formed form a water permeable material having a ring-shaped opening thereto (‘414, FIG. 4) ('414, Paragraph [0022]). The basket portion (filter package 200) excludes any impermeable materials for structure and excludes an outer container or assembly with a bottom or sidewall (‘414, FIG. 4). A separate and reusable coffee filter holder (beverage filter chamber 500a) is unattached to the basket portion (filter package 200). A removable and replaceable filter holder cap (beverage chamber top seal 510) is disposed to cover the coffee filter holder (beverage filter chamber 500a) (‘414, FIG. 4) ('414, Paragraphs [0008] and [0023]). Hermanowski et al. further discloses a tab (tab 210a) extending from the disposable beverage filter (‘414, FIG. 4) to facilitate easy loading and unloading of the filter into a beverage maker (‘414, Paragraph [0022]). Although Hermanowski does not explicitly teach the tab extending from an inner edge of the collar and extending into the ring shaped opening, the configuration of the claimed tab is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed tab was significant (MPEP § 2144.04.IV.B.). The disposition of the claimed tab does not provide a non-obvious functional difference over the prior art since Hermanowski et al. teaches incorporating a filter tab to facilitate loading and unloading of the tab, which would occur regardless of the specific orientation of the tab. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the filter of Sweeney et al. and provide a tab extending from the disposable beverage filter as taught by Hermanowski et al. in order to facilitate easy loading and unloading of the filter into a beverage maker ('414, Paragraph [0022]), which would occur regardless of the specific orientation of the tab.
Further regarding Claim 12, it is noted that the limitations “a collar made separate from and not integral with any frame” are rejected as being indefinite under 35 USC 112(b) as enumerated above. Insofar as it can be understood that applicant actually meant to recite a collar made separate from and directly attached to and disposed about an outer periphery of the ring shaped opening of the basket portion, if it were considered desirable for any reason to obtain access to the collar to which the basket portion is applied, it would be obvious to make the collar removable for that purpose in view of In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961) (MPEP § 2144.04.V.C.). Furthermore, limitations with respect to constructing the collar separate from the basket portion are product by process limitations. Even though product by process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product by process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process in view of In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (MPEP § 2113.I.).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rivera US 2013/0139699 in view of Wahhas US 2014/0342058, Zweed US 2014/0170281, and Hermanowski et al. US 2013/0164414 as applied to claim 12 above in further view of Beaulieu et al. US 2010/0303964.
Regarding Claim 13, Rivera modified with Wahhas, Zweed, and Hermanowski is silent regarding the basket portion including at least two different materials forming different portions of the basket portion.
Beaulieu et al. discloses a disposable beverage filter comprising a basket portion (filter 30) formed from a water permeable material having a ring shaped opening thereto (‘964, FIG. 2) ('964, Paragraph [0034]). Beaulieu et al. further discloses the basket portion (filter 30) including at least two different materials (coarse filter portion) (fine filter portion) (two or more separate components) forming different portions of the basket portion. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the filter basket portion of modified Rivera and include at least two different materials forming different portions of the basket portion as taught by Beaulieu et al. in order to initially filter out relatively large particles and then filter relatively smaller particles ('964, Paragraph [0034]).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rivera US 2013/0139699 in view of Wahhas US 2014/0342058, Zweed US 2014/0170281, and Hermanowski et al. US 2013/0164414 as applied to claim 12 above in further view of Cai US 2006/0280841.
Regarding Claim 14, Rivera modified with Wahhas, Zweed, and Hermanowski et al. is silent regarding the basket portion including at least a first chamber separated from a second chamber.
Cai discloses a disposable beverage filter (bottom filter 102) formed from a water permeable material i.e. paper (‘841, Paragraph [0036]). Cai further discloses a drink cartridge that includes three or more chambers (‘841, bottom chamber 11a, top chamber 11b, round protruded chamber 119) (‘841, FIG. 3) (‘841, Paragraph [0033]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the beverage filter system of modified Rivera and provide a drink cartridge that includes three or more chambers as taught by Cai in order to separate beverage making components, i.e. first flavor containing materials 12a e.g. milk powder or granules, creamer, chocolate, cocoa, sugar, proteins, fat, vitamins, or other appropriate soluble solids from second flavor containing materials 12b e.g. coffee grounds (‘841, Paragraph [0030]) from a chamber (round protruded chamber 119) that connects to a drink apparatus (‘841, Paragraph [0033]), until ready for use.
Claims 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rivera US 2013/0139699 in view of Wahhas US 2014/0342058, Zweed US 2014/0170281, and Cai US 2006/0280841.
Regarding Claim 15, Rivera discloses a beverage filter system comprising a basket portion (filter paper cup 40’ or 40”) formed entirely from a water permeable and disposable material of a paper based material (‘699, FIG. 44A) (‘699, Paragraphs [0116]-[0118] and [0243]). The basket portion (filter paper cup 40’ or 40”) has a ring shaped opening thereto (circular opening onto which a circular coffee holder lid 32f is disposed thereon) (‘699, Paragraph [0242]). Filter paper cup 40” that reads on the claimed basket portion in FIG. 44A is depicted as a solid object without any additional structure and also does not have an outer container or assembly with a bottom or sidewall. Therefore, Rivera teaches a basket portion (filter paper cup 40’ or 40”) excludes any impermeable materials for structure or support and further excludes an outer container or assembly with a bottom or a sidewall. Rivera also discloses a collar (rim 40c) being attached directly to and disposed about an outer periphery of the ring shaped opening of the basket portion (filter paper cup 40’ or 40”) (‘699, FIG. 44A) (‘699, Paragraphs [0211], [0244], and [0248]), a separate reusable coffee filter holder (coffee holder base 31d), and a removable and replaceable filter holder cap (coffee holder lid 32f) disposed over the coffee filter holder (coffee holder base 31d) (‘699, Paragraph [0243]) wherein the collar (rim 40c) is in direct contact with an undersurface of the filter holder cap (coffee holder lid 32f) and the basket portion (filter paper cup 40’ or 40”) is disposed directly adjacent the reusable coffee filter holder (coffee holder base 31d) without any intermediate structure therebetween (‘699, FIGS. 44B-44C) (‘699, Paragraph [0244]). The collar (rim 40c) is made of a disposable material (‘699, Paragraph [0243]).
Rivera is silent regarding the paper based material of the basket portion (filter paper cup 40’ or 40”) to be made of a biodegradable and compostable paper material. Rivera is also silent regarding the collar being formed from a resilient, biodegradable, and compostable material and at least two or more chambers.
Wahhas discloses a beverage filter system comprising a basket portion (filter 12) (‘058, Paragraph [0014]) formed entirely from a water permeable, disposable (recyclable), biodegradable, and compostable paper based material (‘058, Paragraphs [0012]-[0013]), the basket portion (filter 12) having a ring shaped opening thereto and a collar (edge of filter 12 that is fused between rim of cup 10 and lid 14) attached directly to and disposed about an outer periphery of the ring shaped opening of the basket portion (filter 12) (‘058, FIG. 3) (‘058, Paragraphs [0015]-[0016]).
Both Rivera and Wahhas are directed towards the same field of endeavor of beverage filter systems comprising a basket portion formed entirely from a water permeable and disposable paper based material. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the generic paper based basket portion filter of Rivera and construct the basket portion filter out of a paper based material that is biodegradable and compostable as taught by Wahhas in order to make the beverage filter system to be environmentally friendly (‘058, Paragraph [0004]) and more eco-friendly than traditional K-cups and to make the beverage filter system completely recyclable (‘058, Paragraph [0013]).
Further regarding Claim 15, Rivera modified with Wahhas is silent regarding the collar being formed from a resilient material and at least two or more chambers.
Zweed discloses a beverage filter system comprising a collar (sealing element 305) formed from a resilient, compostable material (paper) (‘281, FIG. 4) (‘281, Paragraph [0041]).
Both modified Rivera and Zweed are directed towards the same field of endeavor of beverage filter systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the beverage filter system of modified Rivera and construct the collar from a resilient and compostable material of paper as taught by Zweed since the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination in view of Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945) (MPEP § 2144.07). Zweed teaches that there was known utility in the beverage filter art to construct a collar of a basket portion formed of paper from a resilient and biodegradable material as taught by in order to allow the collar to fit better and/or more firmly onto a clamping edge of a capsule/coffee filter holder (‘281, Paragraph [0041]).
Further regarding Claim 15, Rivera modified with Wahhas and Zweed is silent regarding two or more chambers.
Cai discloses a disposable beverage filter (bottom filter 102) formed from a water permeable material i.e. paper (‘841, Paragraph [0036]). Cai further discloses a drink cartridge that includes three or more chambers (‘841, bottom chamber 11a, top chamber 11b, round protruded chamber 119) (‘841, FIG. 3) (‘841, Paragraph [0033]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the beverage filter system of modified Rivera and provide a drink cartridge that includes two or more chambers as taught by Cai in order to separate beverage making components, i.e. first flavor containing materials 12a e.g. milk powder or granules, creamer, chocolate, cocoa, sugar, proteins, fat, vitamins, or other appropriate soluble solids from second flavor containing materials 12b e.g. coffee grounds (‘841, Paragraph [0030]) from a chamber (round protruded chamber 119) that connects to a drink apparatus (‘841, Paragraph [0033]), until ready for use.
Further regarding Claim 15, it is noted that the limitations “a collar made separate from and not integral with any frame” are rejected as being indefinite under 35 USC 112(b) as enumerated above. Insofar as it can be understood that applicant actually meant to recite a collar made separate from and directly attached to and disposed about an outer periphery of the ring shaped opening of the basket portion, if it were considered desirable for any reason to obtain access to the collar to which the basket portion is applied, it would be obvious to make the collar removable for that purpose in view of In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961) (MPEP § 2144.04.V.C.). Furthermore, limitations with respect to constructing the collar separate from the basket portion are product by process limitations. Even though product by process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product by process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process in view of In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (MPEP § 2113.I.).
Regarding Claim 16, Rivera modified with Wahhas, Zweed, and Cai is silent regarding the collar and the basket portion being formed as an integral unit. However, the use of a one piece construction instead of the structure disclosed in AAPA would be merely a matter of obvious engineering choice."); but see Schenck v. Nortron Corp., 713 F.2d 782, 218 USPQ 698 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (MPEP § 2144.04.V.B.).
Regarding Claims 16-17, the recitations of the collar and the basket portion being formed either as an integral unit or being formed separately and joined together are product by process limitations. “[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. It the product in the product by process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (MPEP § 2113.I.).
Regarding Claim 18, Rivera discloses an embodiment wherein a tab (extended rim 40c’) extends from the disposable beverage filter (‘699, FIG. 49A) (‘699, Paragraph [0248]).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rivera US 2013/0139699 in view of Wahhas US 2014/0342058, Zweed US 2014/0170281, and Cai US 2006/0280841 as applied to claim 18 above in further view of Hermanowski et al. US 2013/0164414.
Regarding Claim 19, Rivera modified with Wahhas, Zweed, and Cai is silent regarding the tab extending from an inner edge of the collar and extending into the ring shaped opening.
Hermanowski et al. discloses a disposable beverage filter comprising a basket portion (filter package 200) formed form a water permeable material having a ring-shaped opening thereto (‘414, FIG. 4) ('414, Paragraph [0022]). The basket portion (filter package 200) excludes any impermeable materials for structure and excludes an outer container or assembly with a bottom or sidewall (‘414, FIG. 4). A separate and reusable coffee filter holder (beverage filter chamber 500a) is unattached to the basket portion (filter package 200). A removable and replaceable filter holder cap (beverage chamber top seal 510) is disposed to cover the coffee filter holder (beverage filter chamber 500a) (‘414, FIG. 4) ('414, Paragraphs [0008] and [0023]). Hermanowski et al. further discloses a tab (tab 210a) extending from the disposable beverage filter (‘414, FIG. 4) to facilitate easy loading and unloading of the filter into a beverage maker (‘414, Paragraph [0022]). Although Hermanowski does not explicitly teach the tab extending from an inner edge of the collar and extending into the ring shaped opening, the configuration of the claimed tab is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed tab was significant (MPEP § 2144.04.IV.B.). The disposition of the claimed tab does not provide a non-obvious functional difference over the prior art since Hermanowski et al. teaches incorporating a filter tab to facilitate loading and unloading of the tab, which would occur regardless of the specific orientation of the tab. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the filter of Sweeney et al. and provide a tab extending from the disposable beverage filter as taught by Hermanowski et al. in order to facilitate easy loading and unloading of the filter into a beverage maker ('414, Paragraph [0022]), which would occur regardless of the specific orientation of the tab.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the obviousness rejections of Claims 1 and 3-19 under 35 USC 103(a) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Polat et al. US 2007/0232179 discloses a biodegradable coffee filter made of a fibrous structure (‘179, Paragraph [0038]) wherein the fibers are cellulose natural fibers of corn pulp (‘179, Paragraph [0027]).
Hollenberg et al. US 6,432,272 discloses webs made from various fibers including cellulosic fibers in conjunction with various additive fibers including wet resilience fibers that are crosslinked pulp fibers (‘272, Column 4, lines 42-60) wherein various fibers are employed in forming the webs wherein other types of fibers and filaments are used to provide a desired resiliency (‘272, Column 3, lines 45-57).
Austin et al. US 2014/0287104 discloses a filtration material in the form of a resilient filtration pad wherein the filter comprises fibers of substantially water insoluble material such as a woven or nonwoven fabric wherein the fibers making up the filter are cellulose fibers, polyolefin fibers or nylon fibers (‘104, Paragraph [0047]).
Favre US 5,472,719 discloses a capsule comprising a filter (filter membrane 43) made of a nonwoven sheet of a mixture of synthetic polymeric fibers and cellulose fibers wherein the filter (filter membrane 43) is sufficiently flexible and resilient to avoid being punctured (‘719, FIGS. 12A-12B) (‘719, Column 8, lines 23-37).
Axrup et al. US 2012/0251818 discloses a package comprising a paper or paperboard substrate wherein the package is used as a food or liquid package (‘818, Paragraph [0018]) having improved resistance against liquids, oxygen, or other gases (‘818, Paragraph [0027]).
Laleg et al. US 2012/0080156 discloses a paperboard base sheet comprising one or more fibrous layers or plies and generally with no filler addition used for food packaging board (‘156, Paragraph [0010]).
Capitani US 2014/0083873 discloses a coffee capsule (‘873, Paragraph [0002]) comprising a tray like body made of a sheet of paper or paper material made from wood or cellulose pulp and other fibers such as cotton, linen, hemp, and more commonly used recycled paper (‘873, Paragraphs [0016]-[0017]) wherein the cover is also made from paper or paper material (‘873, Paragraph [0019]) wherein the sheet of paper used to form the body has walls having reduced rigidity and thereby high deformability (‘873, Paragraph [0021]) wherein the peripheral annular rim includes at least one annular portion of the sheet of paper formed integrally with the tray like body (‘873, Paragraph [0028]).
Asayama et al. US 2002/0012759 discloses a molding base paper used as a material for food vessels (‘759, Paragraph [0001]) and moist foods, drinks, and soups (‘759, Paragraph [0022]) wherein the molded base paper is natural pulp fibers, wood fiber pulps, or non wood fibers (‘759, Paragraphs [0048], [0054], and [0056]) wherein the molding base paper is recyclable (‘759, Paragraph [0061]).
Tinkler et al. US 2015/0201791 discloses a beverage capsule comprising a deformable arrangement (‘791, Paragraph [0038]) wherein the container and/or lid is made from combinations of biopolymers, compostable polymers, paper, and/or foils (‘791, Paragraph [0039]) and a separate reusable coffee filter holder (cartridge holder 9) to hold a collar (lip) of a beverage pod (cartridge 2 or carafe cartridge 5) (‘791, Paragraph [0051]) (‘791, FIG. 9) (‘791, Paragraphs [0056] and [0061]).
Smith et al. US 2015/0201789 discloses a cartridge holder having an opening arranged to receive and support a cartridge of different sizes and/or shapes wherein the cartridge holder engages with the cartridge at a rim at or below a flange to which a lid of the cartridge is attached wherein different cartridges have different rim sizes and/or shapes (‘789, Paragraph [0041]).
Hristov et al. US 2014/0272048 discloses a method of using a reusable beverage cartridge to form a beverage including inserting a filter basket containing beverage material through an opening in a top of a cartridge body to place the filter basket in an interior space of the body wherein a cover is then engaged with the top opening of the body to seal the top opening closed and the body placed into a cartridge holder of a beverage forming machine such that a bottom of the body is exposed with the cartridge holder in the open position (‘048, Paragraph [0010]) wherein the entire filter basket is made of a wire or plastic mesh (‘048, Paragraph [0038]).
Ciaramelli US 2014/0161945 discloses a beverage production device comprising a receptacle suitable to receive a pod manufactured from filter paper and comprising an extractable product (‘945, FIGS. 6-8) (‘945, Paragraphs [0033]-[0035] and [0123]) wherein refillable cartridges are also used with the retaining device or if necessary a sleeve to be sized and dimensioned for one or more types of cartridges wherein if alternative cartridges are formed with filter structures extending along the sides of the cartridge the sleeve are sized and dimensioned to provide a radial dimension or gap between the outside of the filter walls and the inside of the sleeves to accommodate passage of brew dispensed from the filter walls wherein the top edge or rim of such a cartridge is retained along the upper edge of the sleeve so as to securely retain the cartridge during the brewing process (‘423, Paragraph [0034]).
Clark US 2013/0263423 discloses other forms of cartridges are available and all are able to be used with the device wherein cartridge not requiring puncturing of a lower portion are used with the retaining device wherein the cartridge is formed with a rim (‘423, Paragraph [0033]).
Estabrook et al. US 2012/0321756 discloses a cartridge having any suitable form such as a op of opposed layers of filter paper encapsulating a beverage medium, capsule, sachet, and/or any other arrangement wherein the cartridge is pervious to allow water to pass into the cartridge, the cartridge including a filter or not including a filter (‘756, Paragraph [0034]) wherein the container need not include a lid and the container has a relatively rigid and/or resilient construction so that container tends to maintain its shape or made to have a more compliant and/or deformable arrangement like a sachet made from a sheet of deformable material (‘756, Paragraph [0037]) wherein the container and/or lid is made of biopolymers, compostable polymers, paper, foils, etc. (‘756, Paragraph [0036]) wherein the cartridge holder comprises one or more inlet and/or outlet needles to puncture the cartridge if needed or the lid or other cartridge portion is opened for flow by introducing pressure at an exterior of the lid or other portion wherein water pressure is introduced at the site which water pressure causes the lid to be pierced or otherwise opened to allow flow in the cartridge (‘756, Paragraph [0049]).
Clark et al. US 2012/0302119 discloses a food filter made of a fibrous article comprising a water dispersible fiber, the multicomponent fiber, microdeniers fibers, or water non-dispersible polymer microfibers wherein the fibrous articles include multifilament fibers, yarns, cords, tapes, fabrics, wet laid webs, dry laid webs, melt blown webs, spunbonded webs, thermobonded webs, hydroentangled webs, nonwoven web and fabrics, and combinations thereof (‘119, Paragraph [0229]).
Murray et al. US 2009/0211963 discloses a porous liner that fits within a filter chamber which conforms to the filter chamber inner wall wherein the liner comprises a disposable mesh bag that fits in the filter chamber and is captured between the filter chamber wall and the lid wherein the liner is used to collect and remove coffee grounds and food particles from the filter chamber (‘963, Paragraph [0038]).
Dorfmueller US 2009/0229470 discloses a coffee cartridge lid apparatus
Acuff et al. US 5,171,457 discloses a beverage filter comprising a tab (adhesive tab 15) adhered to the filter near its upper rim for removal of the filter and used coffee grounds (‘457, FIG. 4) (‘457, Column 2, lines 43-54) wherein the beverage filter system comprises a basket portion (open top filter cup 32) formed entirely from a water permeable material having a ring shaped opening thereto, a collar (laterally extending rim 33) attached directly to and disposed about an outer periphery of the ring shaped opening of the basket portion (open top filter cup 32), a separate reusable coffee filter holder (coffee maker drip coffee containing compartment 30), and a filter holder cap (separate cover sheet 35) disposed over the coffee filter holder (compartment 30) (‘457, FIGS. 6-7) (‘457, Column 2, lines 66-68) (‘457, Column 3, lines 1-6).
PNG
media_image5.png
996
771
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Benedict US 4,735,719 discloses a coffee filter ring molded from a polypropylene material or formed of metal or a paper like material that is disposable wherein the coffee filter ring is placed on or within a filter element depending upon the relative diameter of the element with respect to the coffee filter ring wherein the flanges of the filter ring engages with the upper portion of the filter paper (‘719, Column 5, lines 1-34).
McFarlin US 5,120,439 discloses a coffee filter tab.
Furneaux US 2007/0259139 discloses a compostable filter sheet