Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/366,877

Beverage Maker

Final Rejection §DP
Filed
Jul 02, 2021
Examiner
ALEXANDER, REGINALD
Art Unit
3761
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Hamilton Beach Brands Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
1532 granted / 2021 resolved
+5.8% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+18.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
2043
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
43.0%
+3.0% vs TC avg
§102
30.2%
-9.8% vs TC avg
§112
19.2%
-20.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 2021 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 13-18 in the reply filed on 21 April 2025 is acknowledged. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 13-24 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2 of U.S. Patent No. 11,083,331. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they are merely an obvious variation of the patented claims. Terminal Disclaimer The terminal disclaimer does not comply with 37 CFR 1.321 because: The disclaimer fee in accordance with 37 CFR 1.20(d) has not been submitted, nor is there any authorization in the application file to charge a specified Deposit Account or credit card. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 13-24 are allowable over the prior art of record. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see applicant’s arguments, filed 25 August 2025, with respect to claims 13-18 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims under Section 112 has been withdrawn. 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 REGINALD L. ALEXANDER whose telephone number is (571)272-1395. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 5:30-2:00. 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, Ibrahime Abraham can be reached at 571-270-5569. 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. /REGINALD ALEXANDER/ Examiner Art Unit 3761
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 02, 2021
Application Filed
Aug 25, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
May 21, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §DP
Aug 25, 2025
Response Filed
Aug 25, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 11, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 11, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 30, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 04, 2025
Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599265
BEVERAGE MACHINE WITH SEPARABLE FLUID MODULE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12590708
DOUGH PREPARATION APPARATUS AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582259
METHOD OF MAKING INFANT FORMULA AND RELATED DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575694
COFFEE MACHINE WITH DYNAMIC FLOW AND TEMPERATURE CONTROL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12575693
SMART BEVERAGE SYSTEM, APPARATUS, AND METHOD OF USING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
76%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+18.4%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 2021 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month