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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 10 July 2025 has been entered.
A drawing objection has been added in the current Office action.
Applicant’s arguments, please see pages 6-9, filed 10 July 2025, with respect to the rejection of claim 1 under 35 USC § 103 have been fully considered but are not persuasive. Therefore, the claims remain rejected as obvious in view of the prior art.
Status of the Claims
In the amendment dated 10 July 2025, the status of the claims is as follows: Claims 1, 8-9, and 20-21 have been amended. Claims 6-7, 10, and 13-14 have been cancelled.
Claims 1, 8-9, 12, 15-17, and 20-23 are pending.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because figure 1 shows a small outlet 600b that is in a bolder font than the other numbers shown in the figure. As stated in 37 CFR 1.84 / MPEP 608, numbers in drawings may use “different thicknesses” when the “different thicknesses have a different meaning.” In fig. 1, it is not apparent why the number 600b has a different thickness than the other numbers in the drawing.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “supporter” in claim 1.
The generic placeholder is “supporter” (defined as means for supporting). The functional limitations attributed to the claimed “supporter” include “supports the extractor and dispenser” and “supports the first motor and the second motor, rotatably supports the housing.”
Structure that is used from the Specification to cover the functional limitations includes a “bracket” and equivalents thereof (paragraph 0053 of the Specification).
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claims 1, 8-9, 12, 15-17, and 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin (US-20130125759-A1) in view of Song et al. (KR-101693261-B1, referencing foreign version for drawings and provided English translation for written disclosure), Siegal et al. (US-20160348769-A1), and Lee et al. (KR-101896838-B1, hereinafter Lee ‘838).
Regarding claim 1, Lin teaches a coffee maker (“Coffee maker enabling automated drip brewing,” title), comprising:
an extractor (“a coffee filter and an extracted-liquid-holding vessel,” para 0017) that is configured to receive ground coffee (“ground coffee beans on the filter,” para 0018) and water (“pouring water,” para 0018) and that is configured to extract liquid coffee (“extracted-liquid-holding vessel,” para 0017) from the ground coffee and the water (“brewed coffee,” para 0018; the filter and vessel taught in para 0017 are construed as being in the brewing space 14, fig. 1);
a dispenser (fig. 3) configured to supply the water to the ground coffee in the extractor (water is supplied from the water storage device 20, fig. 3; para 0030);
and a supporter (housing 10, fig. 1; includes a base 11, column 12, and top 13; the top 13 is construed as a bracket) that supports the extractor (the brewing space 14 is supported by the base 11, fig. 1) and the dispenser (the hollow column 12 and top 13 in fig. 1 support the construed dispenser shown in fig. 3),
wherein the dispenser (fig. 3) includes:
an arm (outlet piping 22, driving device 30, and rotating mechanism 41, fig. 3, i.e., everything in fig. 3 except for the water storage tank 20) that is rotatably disposed (fig. 8; para 0043) above an inlet of the extractor (“a spiral rotational course from a center point to outer and inner areas of a filter,” abstract; the top of the filter is construed as the claimed “inlet”) and that includes a nozzle (pipe pointing down at the end of pipe 220, fig. 2) configured to supply the water to the extractor (paras 0037 and 0045), and
a bracket (moveable member 422 and bearing 427, fig. 6) that is coupled to the supporter (the moveable member 422 is coupled to the top 13, fig. 2) and that is configured to rotatably support the arm (supports the piping 22; “adapted to shift along with the rotating mechanism,” para 0037).
wherein the arm includes:
a housing (construed as the turntable 411, plates 425, and seats 420, fig. 5) disposed at a first end of the arm (right end of the construed arm— outlet piping 22, driving device 30, and rotating mechanism 41, fig. 2),
a rail (rail 415, fig. 2) that extends from the housing (extends from the turntable 411, fig. 4) and that is configured to support movement of the nozzle (the rail 415 supports the moveable member 422, which is connected to pipe 220, fig. 2; para 0035),
a first actuator (shifting mechanism 42, fig. 4) that is disposed in the housing (located between the turntable 411, plates 425, and seats 420, fig. 4) and that is configured to linearly move the nozzle (“linearly shifts,” para 0043) along the rail (shifts moveable member 422, which is located on the rail 415, fig. 4) to a position where the nozzle is above the inlet of the extractor (paras 0043 and 0045), and
a second actuator (rotating mechanism 41, fig. 4) that is disposed at the arm (mechanism 41 is disposed on top of the construed arm, fig. 2) and that is configured to rotate the housing (rotates the gear 413, which rotates the turntable 411, para 0034 and fig. 8) to orient the nozzle (para 0043) at a predetermined angle (angles based on the rotation shown in fig. 8) relative to the inlet of the extractor (“counterclockwise in a spiral rotational course,” para 0043; construed as a counterclockwise spiral over the top of the filter described in para 0045),
wherein the second actuator (rotating mechanism 41, fig. 4) includes:
a first gear (second gear 413, fig. 4) disposed on the housing (gear 413 is the top of the construed housing, fig. 4);
a second gear (first gear 412, fig. 4) that engages with the first gear (as shown in fig. 4); and
a second motor (motor 31, fig. 4) disposed outside the housing (the motor 31 is located to the left of the turntable 411, fig. 2) and configured to rotate the housing (paras 0031 and 0034; fig. 4)
wherein the second actuator (rotating mechanism 41, fig. 4) is configured to rotate (para 0034) the first actuator (shifting mechanism 42, fig.4; rotates with the turntable 411, fig. 8) with the arm (outlet piping 22, driving device 30, and rotating mechanism 41, fig. 3) at a same angle (the construed arm is kept at 90 degrees relative to the water storage device 20, fig. 3) and at a same speed (during rotation shown in fig. 8, the shifting mechanism 42 is construed as having the same rotational speed that the gear 413 has, fig. 3).
Lin, fig. 4
PNG
media_image1.png
764
905
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Lin does not explicitly disclose wherein the first actuator includes: a rack gear arranged inside the housing and the rail and coupled to the nozzle, wherein a portion of the rack gear is configured to (i) enter and be accommodated within the housing and (ii) deform and wind within the housing based on movement of the rack gear; a pinion that (i) is rotatably disposed within the housing, (ii) engages with the rack gear and (iii) is configured to move the rack gear; and a first motor disposed outside the housing and configured to rotate the pinion to move the nozzle; wherein the bracket includes: a slot extending to the bracket in a circumferential direction at a predetermined length, and a connecting rod that is disposed at the housing and that is coupled to the first motor through the slot, and wherein a movement of the connecting rod is limited to the predetermined length of the slot such that the rotation of the arm is limited.
However, in the same field of endeavor of coffee makers, Song teaches wherein the first actuator (moving means 40, fig. 8; includes step motor 41, pinion gear 42, and rack gear 44, fig. 8) includes: a rack gear (rack gear 44, fig. 8) arranged inside the housing and the rail (the rack gear 44 taught by Song is construed as replacing the screw rod 421 taught by Lin; Lin’s screw rod 421 is located between the turntable 411 and seats 420 and plates 450, fig. 5) and coupled to the nozzle (Song’s rack gear 44 is coupled with the nozzle 45, fig. 8), wherein a portion of the rack gear (rack gear 44, fig. 8) of the first actuator (moving means 40, fig. 8) is configured to (i) enter the housing and be accommodated within the housing (the gear 44 is located within the bracket holding the nozzle, figs. 8 and 17); a pinion (pinion gear 42, fig. 8) that (i) is rotatably disposed within the housing (“rotational driving force,” para 0098; the pinion gear 42 taught by Song is construed as replacing the link 423 taught by Lin; Lin’s link 423 is located between the turntable 411 and top of tubular member 414, fig. 5), (ii) engages with the rack gear and (iii) is configured to move the rack gear (para 0116); and a first motor (step motor 41, fig. 8) disposed outside the housing (step motor 41 is disposed outside of the bracket for holding the nozzle tube, fig. 8) and configured to rotate the pinion to move the nozzle (provides “linear displacement” when the pinion gear is turned, para 0098).
Song, fig. 8
PNG
media_image2.png
727
862
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Lin to include, using a moving means 40, in view of the teachings of Song, by using the step motor 41, pinion gear 42, and rack gear 44, as taught by Song, instead of using the screw rod 421, as taught by Lin, because this amounts to a simple substitution of one rotational/linear drive device (based on Lin’s a screw rod 421) with another rotational/linear drive device that is known in the art (based on Song’s rack gear 42) with predictable results (the substitution of one linear drive actuator with another would produce the same linear motion for the nozzle to achieve the desired spiral pattern taught by Lin)
Lin/Song do not explicitly disclose wherein a portion of the rack gear is configured to (ii) deform and wind within the housing, wherein the bracket includes: a slot extending to the bracket in a circumferential direction at a predetermined length, and a connecting rod that is disposed at the housing and that is coupled to the first motor through the slot, and wherein a movement of the connecting rod is limited to the predetermined length of the slot such that the rotation of the arm is limited.
However, in the same field of endeavor of rack and pinion gear moving mechanisms, Siegal teaches wherein a portion of the rack gear (moveable member 35 and segments 50a-50g, fig. 1C) is configured to (ii) deform and wind (segments 50a-50g curve and deform fig. 1C) within the housing (housing 10, fig. 1F; para 0103; construed as being located in the space over the turntable 411 and between the plates 425 and seats 420 taught by Lin).
Siegal, fig. 1C
PNG
media_image3.png
865
593
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Lin/Song to include, a segmented member 35 that curves into a housing 10, in view of the teachings of Siegal, by using the segmented assembly 50, the curved channel 12, and the curved portion 16, as taught by Siegal, to connect with the rack gear 44 in the moving means 40, as taught by Song, in order to use a rack gear that extends into a curved channel as opposed to a straight channel, facilitating a smaller linear rack gear portion but one that can extend just as far as a result of the segmented assembly, for the advantage of facilitating a nozzle design for a coffee maker that is more compact and portable because of the segmented assembly.
Ling/Song/Siegal do not explicitly disclose wherein the bracket includes: a slot extending to the bracket in a circumferential direction at a predetermined length, and a connecting rod that is disposed at the housing and that is coupled to the first motor through the slot, and wherein a movement of the connecting rod is limited to the predetermined length of the slot such that the rotation of the arm is limited.
However, in the same field of endeavor of coffee makers, Lee ‘838 teaches wherein the bracket includes: a slot (spiral pattern in the body 510 in fig. 3) extending to the bracket (the moveable member 422 and bearing 427 taught by Lin is construed as being at the place where the motor 511 is located, fig. 3 of Lee ‘838) in a circumferential direction at a predetermined length (spiral pattern extends in a circumferential direction and has a specific length, fig. 3), and a connecting rod (nozzle 520, fig. 2, which is construed as representing a rod) that is disposed at the housing (slot 531, fig. 3) and that is coupled to the first motor (motor 511, fig. 3) through the slot (para 0022), and wherein a movement of the connecting rod (nozzle 520, fig. 2) is limited to the predetermined length of the slot (spiral pattern in the body 510, fig. 3) such that the rotation of the arm is limited (rotation is limited to the spiral pattern shown in fig. 3).
Lee ‘838, fig 3
PNG
media_image4.png
804
787
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Lin to include, using the spiral structure 500, as taught by Lee ‘838, such that it was mounted below the turntable 411 and connected to the bearing 427, as taught by Lin, and the outlet of the pipe 220, as taught by Lin, was inserted into the nozzle 520, as taught by Lee ‘838, in order to move the nozzle in a precise predetermined spiral-form structure, such that the hot water was applied to the coffee powder in the exact same pattern, ensuring a repeatable brewing procedure that produced a consistent brewing product.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Lin in view of Song, Siegal, and Lee ‘838, as set forth above regarding claim 7, teaches the invention of claim 8. Specifically, Siegal teaches wherein the housing (housing 10, fig. 1E) includes: a first guide (curved channel 12, fig. 1E) configured to guide, to the pinion (circular gear 64, fig. 1C), the rack gear (moveable member 35 and segments 50a-50g, fig. 1C) as the rack gear enters the housing (“the curved channel 12 has a straight portion 14 and a curved portion 16,” para 0103; construed such that the straight portion 14 in fig.1E guides the moveable member 35 in the direction towards the circular gear 64 in fig. 1C); and a second guide (curved portion 16, fig. 1E) configured to guide the rack gear to deform and wind within the housing (housing 10, fig. 1F; “curved shape,” para 0103; construed as being located in the space over the turntable 411 and between the plates 425 and seats 420 taught by Lin).
Regarding claim 9, Lin teaches the invention as described above but does not explicitly disclose wherein the housing includes a roller that is arranged adjacent to the pinion within the housing and that is configured to rotate and push the rack gear toward the pinion based on rotation of the roller.
However, in the same field of endeavor of rack and pinion gear moving mechanisms, Siegal teaches wherein the housing (housing 10, fig. 1C) includes a roller (circular gear 66, fig. 1C) that is arranged adjacent to the pinion (circular gear 64, fig. 1C) within the housing (housing 10, fig. 1F) and that is configured to rotate and push the rack gear toward the pinion based on rotation of the roller (“anti-clockwise direction…pushing force,” para 0106).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Lin/Song to include, using the circular gear 66, as taught by Siegal, to connect with the pinion gear 42 in the moving means 40, as taught by Song, in order to apply a pushing force on the segmented assembly, for advantage of providing sufficient force on the segmented assembly to overcome the friction of the curved channel (Siegal, para 0106).
Regarding claim 12, Lin teaches wherein the arm (outlet piping 22, driving device 30, and rotating mechanism 41, fig. 3) further includes a holder (moveable member 422, fig. 6) that is movably disposed on the rail (rail 415, fig. 6; para 0035) and that is configured to hold the nozzle (para 0037).
Regarding claim 15, Lin teaches wherein the first and second actuators (mechanisms 41 and 42, fig. 4) are configured to simultaneously rotate and move the nozzle (fig. 8; para 0043).
Regarding claim 16, Lin teaches wherein one of the first (shifting mechanism 42, fig. 4) and second actuators is configured to move the nozzle in a first direction (“linear shifts,” para 0043), and the other one of the first and second actuators (rotating mechanism 41, fig. 4) is configured to move the nozzle in a second direction (“rotate,” para 0043).
Regarding claim 17, Lin teaches wherein the first and second actuators (mechanisms 41 and 42, fig. 4) are configured to, based on the ground coffee being supplied to the extractor (“when the coffee maker of the present invention is actuated,” para 0043; construed such that it is actuated when ground coffee beans are supplied), move the nozzle to an edge of the inlet of the extractor (pipe 22 moves to the edge of the spiral pattern at the appx 4 o’clock position in fig. 8).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Lin in view of Song, Siegal, and Lee ‘838, as set forth above regarding claim 1, teaches the invention of claim 20. Specifically, Siegal teaches wherein the housing (housing 10, fig. 1E) further includes at least one component (curved channel 12, fig. 1E), and the rack gear (moveable member 35 and segments 50a-50g, fig. 1C) is configured to, based on the rack gear moving through the at least one component, deform and wind within the housing (“forced to assume a curved shape,” para 0103; segments 50a-50g are in a curved shape in fig. 1E, which is construed as deforming and winding).
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Lin in view of Song, Siegal, and Lee ‘838, as set forth above regarding claim 1 teaches the invention of claim 21. Specifically, Lin teaches wherein the second actuator (rotating mechanism 41, fig. 4) is configured to rotate the first motor (step motor 41 taught by Song; construed as being on the turntable 411 taught by Lin) and the pinion (pinion gear 42 taught by Song; construed as being on the turntable 411 taught by Lin) included in the first actuator (shifting mechanism 42, fig. 4) at the same angle and the same speed (by virtue of rotating with the turntable 411, the gear 42 and motor 41 of Song would both have the same angle and rotational speed during rotation) with the arm (outlet piping 22, driving device 30, and rotating mechanism 41, fig. 3).
Claims 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin (US-20130125759-A1) in view of Song et al. (KR-101693261-B1, referencing foreign version for drawings and provided English translation for written disclosure), Siegal et al. (US-20160348769-A1), and Lee et al. (KR-101896838-B1, hereinafter Lee ‘838), as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Choi et al. (US-20150289712-A1, cited 4 April 2024).
Regarding claim 22, Lin teaches the invention as described above but does not explicitly disclose wherein the second motor of the second actuator is disposed above the housing.
However, in the same field of endeavor of coffee makers, Choi teaches wherein the second motor (first motor 353, fig. 5) of the second actuator (rotary drive unit 350, fig. 5) is disposed above the housing (gear 351, figs. 5-6).
Choi, fig. 5
PNG
media_image5.png
968
786
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Song to include, using the rotary drive unit 350, as taught by Choi, instead of the motor 31, as taught by Lin, in order to precisely control the expansion and contraction velocity of a spiral using a pinion gear and bevel gear, for the advantage of providing an extraction method that ensures a constant or consistent taste that does not change because of the accuracy of the rotary drive (Choi, paras 0160 and 171).
Regarding claim 23, the combination of Lin in view of Song, Siegel, Lee ‘838 and Choi as set forth above regarding claim 22 teaches the invention of claim 23. Specifically, Choi teaches wherein the second motor (first motor 353, fig. 5) of the second actuator (rotary drive unit 350, fig. 5) and the housing (main body 321, fig. 5) overlap in a vertical direction of the coffee maker (as shown in fig. 5).
Response to Argument
Applicant’s arguments filed 10 July 2025 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 103
Page 7 of the arguments references Lin (US20130125759) and states that Lin fails to teach the limitation “wherein the second actuator is configured to rotate the first actuator with the arm at the same angle and at a same speed.” Paragraph 0043 of Lin is referenced, and the Applicant explains that Lin teaches linear-shifting mechanism 42 that causes a spiral rotation of the arm 22. The examiner agrees that obtaining a spiral rotation using a linear-shifting mechanism is taught by Lin.
However, the Applicant then explains that Lin’s first actuator 42 and arm 22 “exhibit varying angular positions and rotational speeds relative to each other.” The Applicant’s arguments are not commensurate with the scope of the claims, because the claimed “angle” and “speed” are not defined as being relative between the first actuator and the arm. Because the “angle” and “speed” are not defined and can be any angle or speed, the examiner is able to construct this limitation broadly by using the angle between the construed arm and a water storage device (which is not part of the construed arm) and a rotational speed between the construed first and second actuators. Recommend amending the claim to recite: ““wherein the second actuator is configured to rotate the first actuator with the arm at the same angle between the arm and the first actuator and at a same speed between the arm and the first actuator” in order to overcome Lin in this respect.
Page 9 of the arguments references Lee ‘838 (KR101896838) and asserts that Lee ‘838 does not teach “a movement of the connecting rod is limited to the predetermined length of the slot such that the rotation of the arm is limited.” In the rejection above, the examiner uses a spiral slot, which limits the rotation of the nozzle 520 to teach this limitation (shown in fig. 3 of Lee ‘838). However, the Applicant states that the movement of the nozzle 520 is actually restrained by the rotation guide 530 and not by the spiral slot shown in fig. 3.
The examiner does not agree with this description of Lee ‘838. Lee ‘838 describes the rotation guide 530 as causing rotation instead of limiting the rotation: “the rotation guide 530 is configured such that one of the rotation guides 530 is mounted on the motor 511 and rotated in parallel with the body 510” (paragraph 0052). Lee ‘838 states the “motor 511 … rotates the rotation guide 530” (paragraph 0050).
Lee ‘838 teaches instead that the helical guide 512 has a “helical shape” so that “the nozzle 520 rotates” (paragraph 0053). This helical shape is shown in fig. 3 has a spiral slot, which constrains the nozzle 520 to a prescribed spiral path. The examiner understands fig. 3 of Lee ‘838 such that the rotation guide 530 is the mechanism that causes the nozzle 520 to move. Because the nozzle 520 is constrained to a spiral path, the nozzle rotates as a result of the motion caused by the rotation guide 530 that is connected to the motor 511.
For the above reasons, rejections to the pending claims are respectfully sustained by the examiner.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ERWIN J WUNDERLICH whose telephone number is (571)272-6995. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30-5:30.
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, Edward Landrum can be reached on 571-272-5567. 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.
/ERWIN J WUNDERLICH/Examiner, Art Unit 3761 3/3/2025/EDWARD F LANDRUM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761