DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4 and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kim (US Patent No. 20180288594 A1) hereinafter Kim.
Regarding Claim 1, Kim discloses a beverage dispenser (i.e., a water system) that combines flavored syrup or syrup concentrate with still or water (i.e., a water source) to make soft drinks that are dispensed into a consumer’s cup (i.e., an additive dispenser coupled to the water source; Paragraph 0002). Kim continues to disclose that a mobile computing device (i.e., a user device) may be sent to a server over a network (i.e., a communication network) for interaction with the dispensing device (Paragraph 0038). Kim further discloses a human interface module (Fig. 12, #1206) that contains processor and I/O blocks (i.e., the controller comprising a processor and a memory device; Fig. 12) that connects or communicates with an external device such as the mobile computing device and a core dispense module (i.e., controller; Fig. 12, #1204) where the dispensing device identifies a beverage cartridge upon installation (Paragraph 0070) and the dispensing module controls flows from a plurality of pumps and/or valves (i.e., a smart valve; Fig. 12, #1212) in the dispensing device (Fig. 3, #300) according to a recipe mix and dispense a beverage (i.e., customized water) from the dispensing device (i.e., the controller configured to store instructions which, when executed, cause the processor to: receive, from a user device connected to the communication network, a request for customized water at a point-of-use; determine in real-time a difference between a water characteristic of the water source and a desired water characteristic of the customized water, and control the additive dispenser and the smart valve to modify water received by the additive dispenser from the water source to produce the customized water at the point-of-use based on the difference between the water characteristic of the water source and the desired water characteristic of the customized water; Paragraph 0096) where the mix may comprise a selectable mix of beverage bases, beverage base components, flavors, diluents, and/or sweeteners (Paragraph 0092).
Regarding Claim 2, Kim anticipates the system of Claim 1. Kim further discloses that the systems may include a beverage dispenser (i.e., wherein the point-of-use comprises a water-using appliance that is selected from the group consisting of: a pool, a spa, a water tap, a beverage device, a dishwasher, a washing machine, and a steam oven; Paragraph 0002).
Regarding Claim 3, Kim anticipates the system of Claim 2. Kim further discloses that the water is combined with flavored syrup (i.e., wherein the additive dispenser is configured to deliver at least one additive to the water received from the water source to produce the customized water, the at least one additive being selected from the group consisting of: salt, chlorine, an acidic compound, a basic compound, an aromatic compound, a flavoring compound, a mineral compound, dye, nutrients, an anti-scalant compound, plant fertilizer, detergent, and fabric softener; Paragraph 0002).
Regarding Claim 4, Kim anticipates the system of Claim 3. Kim further discloses the mobile device and the dispensing device may be paired and the mobile device has a unique device ID and a user ID (i.e., the request; Paragraph 0038) and the server, using the user ID, may look up user preferences or a user profile corresponding to a user of the mobile device, and the server may send over a network the user preferences or user profile and the dispensing device may display a customized user interface or otherwise facilitate a personalized interaction with the user based upon the sent preferences (i.e., wherein the instructions, when executed, further cause the processor to: retrieve the custom water profile from a custom water profile data store; Paragraph 0039). Kim discloses that specific preference data may include a user’s favorite beverages and/or custom beverage mixes (i.e., a custom water profile; identify, based on the custom water profile, the at least one additive and at least one amount of the at least one additive to be delivered to the water; Paragraph 0053) and then, upon receiving the device ID, the server may determine that the user is ready to commence interaction with the dispensing device (i.e., wherein the additive dispenser is configured to produce the customized water by delivering the at least one amount of the at least one additive to the water; Paragraph 0055).
Regarding Claim 6, Kim anticipates the system of Claim 3. Kim further discloses that specific preference data may include a user’s favorite beverages and/or custom beverage mixes (i.e., wherein the request identifies the desired water characteristic; Paragraph 0053) and then, upon receiving the device ID, the server may determine that the user is ready to commence interaction with the dispensing device (i.e., and wherein the instructions, when executed, further cause the processor to: cause the additive dispenser to deliver an amount of the at least one additive to the water to produce the customized water having the desired water characteristic; Paragraph 0055).
Regarding Claim 7, Kim anticipates the system of Claim 6. Kim further discloses that the core dispense module identifies a beverage cartridge upon installation (Paragraph 0070) and may control flows according to a recipe to mix and dispense a product from the dispensing device (paragraph 0096) where the beverage components may include diluents such as still or carbonated water, functional additives, beverage bases, and/or flavors (i.e., wherein the instructions, when executed, further cause the processor to: receive sensor data from at least one sensor in fluid communication with an input of the additive dispenser; determine, based on the sensor data, an actual water characteristic of the water received by the additive dispenser; determine a difference between the actual water characteristic to the desired water characteristic; and determine, based on the difference, the amount of the at least one additive to be added to cause the customized water to have the desired water characteristic; Paragraph 0097).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Fritze et al (International Patent No. WO 2006073885 A2) hereinafter Fritze.
Regarding Claim 5, Kim anticipates the system of Claim 4. Kim does not teach wherein the instructions, when executed, further cause the processor to: determine that the at least one amount of the at least one additive is available and insufficient to create the customized water; and cause an error message to be displayed at a user interface associated with the point-of-use, the error message indicating insufficient additive levels are available to complete the request.
However, Fritze teaches that the display (Fig. 1, #109) may communicate information to a user such as system alarms and amounts of remaining wash mediums such as detergent (i.e., the at least one additive) and that the display can be mounted within a door or control panel of the device, or remotely for providing information to the user (Page 12, Lines 23-30) where the absence or amount remaining of wash medium can be indicated to provide an indication of operational problems with the fluid treatment system (i.e., wherein the instructions, when executed, further cause the processor to: determine that the at least one amount of the at least one additive is available and insufficient; and cause an error message to be displayed at a user interface associated with the point-of-use, the error message indicating insufficient additive levels are available to complete the request; Page 6, Lines 21-27). Fritze further teaches with Fig. 6 that the display can be used to inform the user of the need to replace an individual container among multiple replaceable items such that each individual container may be replaced when it is exhausted without concern for the containers with capacity remaining (Page 19, Lines 5-15).
Fritze is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to a fluid treating system for treating a fluid with the addition of additives in regards to washing appliances (Abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the beverage device of Kim with the display containing alarms and amounts of remaining additive because it would provide the ability to replace individual beverage component containers without needing to replace multiple when only one is exhausted.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 03 NOVEMBER 2025 has been entered.
In view of the amendment to the claims, the amendment of claims 1 and 5 has been acknowledged.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 03 NOVEMBER 2025 have been fully considered.
Applicant argues, regarding claim 1, that Kim (US Patent No. 20180288594 A1) hereinafter Kim does not teach that the processor determines the difference of the water characteristic of the water source and the customized water in real-time because Kim simply teaches the following of recipes and not that the system understands the water characteristic of the source water. The system of Kim simply does a recipe and does not need to inherently know the source water characteristics to function (Arguments filed 03 NOVEMBER 2025, Pages 9-10).
Applicant argues, regarding claim 5, that Kim in view of Fritze et al (International Patent No. WO 2006073885 A2) hereinafter Fritze fails to teach the newly amended limitation “determine that the at least one amount of the at least one additive is available and insufficient to create the customized water” because Fritze only teaches the alarming function when the additive is empty and not when the additive is insufficient to create another customized water (Arguments filed 03 NOVEMBER 2025, Page 11, Paragraph 3 to Page 12).
Applicant argues, regarding claims 2-7, that these claims depend upon claim 1 and are allowable because claim 1 is allowable (Arguments filed 03 NOVEMBER 2025, Page 11, Paragraphs 2-3).
The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Regarding Applicant’s arguments for claim 1, Kim teaches where the mix may comprise a selectable mix of beverage bases, beverage base components, flavors, diluents, and/or sweeteners (Paragraph 0092) that the carbonated water may be produced through the mixing of still water and CO2, and that the cartridges are identified to the system upon installation (Paragraph 0070). The constant identification of whether the beverage base is still water or carbonated water and then the need to add carbonation based on the recipe or not is the real-time determination of a difference between a source water characteristic and a desired water characteristic of a customized water. Furthermore, the no flow or full flow (i.e., component fluid volume) is another characteristic difference between the source water and customized water that is determined in real-time when a recipe is called for by a user. There is no functional difference between Kim and the instant claim 1.
Regarding Applicant’s arguments for claim 5, Fritze teaches that the display can be mounted within a door or control panel of the device, or remotely for providing information to the user (Page 12, Lines 23-30) where the absence or amount remaining of wash medium can be indicated to provide an indication of operational problems with the fluid treatment system (Page 6, Lines 21-27). The difference between the teaching of Fritze and the instant application is simply the setting of custom alarm limits. It is well known in the art to set “empty” or “low low level/LL level” alarm notifications on vessels prior to the vessel being completely empty. The most common reason is to prevent a pump from running dry and being destroyed, but another common reason is for insufficient supply to the downstream processes. It is well known that one cannot continue performing a process if a material has run out. As such, the custom alarm limit of slightly above empty does not perform a function that is different from an alarm that actually at empty, beyond conventionally known safety or process reasons.
Regarding the arguments for claims 2-7, claim 1 is not allowable and thus claims 2-7 are also not allowable.
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but are not persuasive. All other arguments have been indirectly addressed.
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 ADAM ADRIEN GERMAIN whose telephone number is (703)756-5499. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 7:30-4:30.
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, Vickie Kim can be reached at (571)272-0579. 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.
/A.A.G./ Examiner, Art Unit 1777
/Ryan B Huang/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1777