DETAILED ACTION
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, 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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 3, 6-8, 10-13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in view of United States Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0092636 (WATSON) in view of United States Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0292100 (BUTTE).
WATSON teaches feeding whiskey (i.e., a distillate and fluid) to a treatment section that pressurizes the whiskey [0008].
This treatment section can include wood pieces [0009].
WATSON teaches that it is desirable to use a pressurized container with a very small volume of air that may be preferred for economy of energy [0026]. Thus, it would have been obvious to use a small container such as a cartridge for economy of energy. However, WATSON also teaches that pressurizable containers with greater percentages of air lead to greater speeds of chemical interaction amongst the vapors, which creates significantly richer aroma [0026]. Thus, the size of the container and amount of air is a result effective variable that can be modified based on one skilled in the art’s need to conserve energy relative to increase the speed of chemical interactions.
In [0008] and [0009], the additional use of a vacuum can also be used. It I also taught that the process can be aged using positive and negative pressures (i.e., in a vacuum, see also [0024]) in a cyclical manner for a short period of time. One or more wood pieces can be used in this method. The combinations of different pressures, different times, amount of air and different wood pieces can be used varied to create beverages with different smoothness in the aging process, different flavor intensities, and different blendings of flavor while maximizing the amount of product being produced by the distiller
WATSON does not teach recirculating the fluids.
However, BUTTE teaches a controlled and accelerated apparatus and method for the accelerated aging of raw alcohol drink products [0010]. Computer controlled pumps and valves are used to circulate (i.e., repeating the process) the raw product through the reaction vessels and systems in a loop until ageing is complete [0010]. In [0040], it is discussed that a plurality of vessels can be used. Thus, BUTTE teaches that the liquid can be recirculated/repeated based on the desired final taste/recipe [0041].
It would have been obvious to circulate the product as taught by BUTTE in WATSON, as this allows the skilled artisan to age the product and correspondingly the taste as desired.
Claim 6
In [0028], WATSON teaches that all the pressurizations can be at room temperature, or ambient temperatures. In an embodiment heating elements can be inserted into the pressurized container and used to increase the contents of the pressurizable container without heating the walls, and thereby saving money in the manufacturing process. Room temperature falls within the claimed range.
Claim 7
Gauge pressure is measured relative to ambient atmospheric pressure. A vessel completely void of any air molecules (at sea level) would be roughly -14.7 PSIG, and ambient air pressure is always measured as 0 PSIG, regardless of whatever current barometric pressure is. In [0008] of WATSON, the pressure ranges from 15 to 5000 psi. Thus, greater than 400 psi falls within that claimed. As to the vacuum, [0024] teaches that a slight vacuum can be used. In this regard it would have been obvious to use a slight vacuum of no less than -14.7 psig.
Claim 8
In [0008] and [0009], the additional use of a vacuum can also be used. It I also taught that the process can be aged using positive and negative pressures (i.e., in a vacuum, see also [0024]) in a cyclical manner for a short period of time ranging from 1 hour to no more than 3 months in a pressurized container. One or more wood pieces can be used in this method. The combinations of different pressures, different times, and different wood pieces can be used varied to create beverages with different smoothness in the aging process, different flavor intensities, and different blendings of flavor while maximizing the amount of product being produced by the distiller. As WATSON teaches holding the whiskey at each stage for a short period of time, it would have been obvious to hold the whiskey at least one treatment of pressure AND vacuum.
WATSON does not teach recirculating the fluids.
However, BUTTE teaches a controlled and accelerated apparatus and method for the accelerated aging of raw alcohol drink products [0010]. Computer controlled pumps and valves are used to circulate/repeat the raw product through the reaction vessels and systems in a loop until ageing is complete [0010]. In [0040], it is discussed that a plurality of vessels can be used. Thus, BUTTE teaches that the liquid can be recirculated based on the desired final taste/recipe [0041].
It would have been obvious to stop the circulating to test, sample, bottle the product at some (e.g., for a property such as taste).
WATSON teaches in [0005] a method of creating an aged, collectable ethanol-containing beverage that is ultra-fast, aging the beverage in less than 3 months to create a flavor and smoothness of a product aged 10 to 30 years. Thus, it would have been obvious provide a drink with a similar taste to a reference aged distilled spirt. This corresponds to (b) with a property being taste.
Additionally, as to property of taste, [0014] teaches rums, made using these technologies to age, flavor, and/or smooth, have been entered in several competitions and have received awards. At the 2008 International Rum Festival, Temptryst Reserve Rum, made using this technology with a blend of woods, won the both a gold medal and the "Best of Category" award in the dark rum category. In the same event, both Temptryst Sugarcane Matured Rum and Temptryst Lemon Wood Rum won gold medals in the dark rum category. Temptryst Peachwood Rum won a silver medal. In the 9-15 Year Aged Category, Temptryst Applewood Rum and Temptryst Hickory Rum won gold medals while Temptryst Live Oak Rum won silver and Temptryst Coconut Wood Rum won bronze. In the +15 Year Aged Category Temptryst Cherrywood VSO won a silver medal. In the white rum category Temptryst Light Dew Rum won a bronze. There were approximately 150 of the finest rums in the world in this competition. At the prestigious 2007 Ministry of Rum Tasting Competition, 3 gold medals, and 4 silver medals were won using a variety of the lower pressures and longer times described herein. At the 2008 Ministry of Rum Tasting Competition, approximately half of the gold medals won in the Dark, Aged, and Premium Categories were won by rums made using a variety of the highest pressures and shortest times described herein. Medals awarded to this group of rums were 7 gold, 4 silver, and 1 bronze.
Thus, WATSON teaches that rum of the invention has a similar taste to traditionally aged rums.
Claim 10
In [0008], WATSON teaches that the process is desirable as it can reduce evaporation as it allows the produced to make and sell more product. It would have been obvious to limit the evaporation to less than five percent as it allows the produced to make and sell more product.
Claims 11-12
As to claims 11 and 12, WATSON is silent as to replacing cartridges.
However, BUTTE teaches in [0037] that if recharging is required reaction canisters are re-charged or replaced and then the cycle moves back to start. The requirements for re-charging and the procedures used for re-charging are included in the originally loaded 602 recipes. The requirements for recharging replacing are based on the recipe parameters and/or encoded into the identification tags of the reaction canisters/vessels/cartridges. Thus, it would have been obvious to replace vessels containers/cartridges based on the parameters of the recipe and usage parameters of cartridge. As noted above, it would have been generally obvious to circulate the product as taught and use cartridges as taught by BUTTE in WATSON because this allows the skilled artisan to age the product and correspondingly the taste as desired.
Claim 13
WATSON is silent as to the replacing cartridges.
However, BUTTE teaches replacing or re-charging cannisters [0037] based on whether the flow of the product matches pre-selected values (e.g., color of the aging fluid, alcohol content of the aging fluid, and chemical composition of the aging fluid) in the BUTTE recipe. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to replace cartridges during the process based on whether the desired parameters have been reached.
Claim 15
In [0008] and [0009], the additional use of a vacuum can also be used. It I also taught that the process can be aged using positive and negative pressures (i.e., in a vacuum, see also [0024]) in a cyclical manner for a short period of time ranging from 1 hour to no more than 3 months in a pressurized container. One or more wood pieces can be used in this method. The combinations of different pressures, different times, and different wood pieces can be used varied to create beverages with different smoothness in the aging process, different flavor intensities, and different blendings of flavor while maximizing the amount of product being produced by the distiller. Given WATSON teaches cycling the process it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art of repeating the steps of cycling.
As WATSON teaches holding the whiskey at each stage for a short period of time, it would have been obvious to hold the whiskey at least one treatment of pressure AND vacuum. Moreover, it would have been obvious to pump the liquid to each section.
WATSON does not teach recirculating.
As noted above, BUTTE teaches a controlled and accelerated apparatus and method for the accelerated aging of raw alcohol drink products [0010]. The devices include newly reaction canisters in a computer controlled environment of valves, pumps, interconnecting plumbing, sensors and mixing and dispersing manifolds ([0010] and abstract). The devices include newly reaction canisters in a computer controlled environment of valves, pumps, interconnecting plumbing, sensors and mixing and dispersing manifolds [0010]. Computer controlled pumps and valves are used to circulate (i.e., repeating the process) the raw product through the reaction vessels and systems in a loop until ageing is complete [0010]. In [0040], it is discussed that a plurality of vessels can be used. Thus, BUTTE teaches that the liquid can be recirculated based on the desired final taste/recipe [0041] and different vessels be used for different treatments.
It would have bene obvious to circulate the product as taught by BUTTE in WATSON, as this allows the skilled artisan to age the product and correspondingly the taste as desired.
Allowed Claims
Claims 16, 18-21 are allowed.
Claims 4, 5 and 14 are objected to as being dependent on 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.
The prior art such as US2010/0092636 (WATSON) teaches an accelerated aging of distilled spirits by mixing the distilled spirits with wood pieces [0024] and then recycling the mixture in a container and subjecting the mixture in the container to various pressures and vacuums to obtain an aged spirit. The prior art does not teach placing a mixture of distilled spirit under various pressures and vacuums in combination with holding the wood pieces in the container while the container is substantially unfilled with a distilled spirit other than at most residual fluid wetting the interior of the at least one treatment cartridge and fluid imbued in the wood pieces.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/30/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The rejections under 35 USC 112(a) and (b) paragraph are withdrawn in view of the changes of the claims.
Given the claim 3 is amended to broaden the claim, WATSON and BUTTE are reapplied for the reasons noted above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHILIP A DUBOIS whose telephone number is (571)272-6107. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:30-6:00p.
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, Nikki Dees can be reached at 571-270-3435. 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.
/PHILIP A DUBOIS/ Examiner, Art Unit 1791
/Nikki H. Dees/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1791
Prosecution Insights