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 .
Allowable Subject Matter
The indicated allowability of claims 5-8 and 24 is withdrawn. In view of the amendments, response to the drawing objections, and Applicant's arguments filed 10/21/2025, further search and consideration has resulted in a better understanding of the claims. Rejections based on this new understanding in view of the previously cited references follow.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/21/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the amendments obviate all indefiniteness rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). Applicant further argues that none of the three references cited in the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) anticipate claim 1. Each argument will be addressed below.
Regarding the indefiniteness rejections:
Claim 2 was rejected based on the limitation “a beverage flow channel for flow of beverage . . . in a downward or horizontal flow direction from the beverage chamber to the coupling means” for a lack of clarity regarding how the underlined phrase is defining the structure. Applicant indicated that the claimed “beverage flow channel” is “the inside of the conduit 211” (Remarks, page 15, third paragraph) and relocated the underlined phrase in the claim, but Examiner asserts that this further confuses what is required of the claimed structure (i.e., the amended claim also results in an indefinite scope, as described in the below rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b)).
Claim 5 was rejected as being unclear with respect to the requirements of the 360 degrees turn. Applicant indicates that Examiner’s interpretation requiring the bend and the 360 degrees turn to be around a single axis is incorrect, but the amended claim does not further define the requirements. In light of this, as well as further consideration of the description on pages 7-8 of the specification, the indefiniteness rejection is withdrawn, and the claim will be interpreted more broadly to include a bend that may change direction to form a 360 degrees turn (as well as the plurality of loops and spiraling section of claims 6-7). According to Examiner’s best understanding, this would be consistent with the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language, and would further be consistent with the written description.
Claim 19 was rejected as being unclear with respect to the structural relationships described. The amended language has not fully resolved this deficiency, in particular regarding the lack of a flexible tube in the beverage container of the independent claims, as described in the below rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Claims 20 and 22 were rejected for being unclear with respect to whether each claim is referring to features previously recited in the independent claim upon which each depends (e.g., the first dispensing line part of claim 1). The amendment does not resolve this deficiency, as described in the below rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), and the relevant grounds for rejection do not appear to be addressed in the Applicant’s Remarks.
Regarding the Peirsman reference:
Applicant argues that Peirsman fails to teach all of the claim limitations because “the first and second dispense line parts 3U and 3D are not fluid tightly coupled to each other, but are fluid tightly coupled to the inline cooler” (Remarks Page 19, last full paragraph). As noted in the below rejection under 102(a)(1), the “inline cooler” (i.e., channel 1C) is a component of the first dispensing line part, and the second dispensing line part (3D) is detachably connected to 1C. Thus, Peirsman discloses “the first dispensing line part and the second dispensing line part fluid tightly coupled to each other with detachable coupling means” as claimed.
Applicant further argues that “Peirsman provides no teaching or suggestion that the first dispensing line part 3U includes any feature that reduces a microorganism migration rate from the downstream flow path section into the beverage chamber” (Remarks Page 20, first paragraph). As noted above, the first dispensing line part includes the inline cooler that inhibits microbial growth through refrigeration, as is commonly known. Thus, Peirsman discloses “wherein the upstream flow path section in the first dispensing line part is arranged to at least reduce a microorganism migration rate from the downstream flow path section into the beverage chamber” as claimed.
Applicant further argues that “Peirsman provides no mechanism to inhibit migration of microorganisms into the beverage container from the dispensing line” and notes that Peirsman teaches that the inline cooler only evacuates a portion of the beverage from the first dispensing line part (Remarks Page 20, first full paragraph). Examiner asserts that, in addition to the effect of refrigeration, evacuation of any portion of the beverage from the dispensing line (Peirsman notes in Paragraph 0070 that the arrangement empties “a substantial part of the dispensing tube from any remaining liquid”) is sufficient to “at least reduce a microorganism migration rate from the downstream flow path section into the beverage chamber” as claimed (i.e., there is a reduced amount of liquid in which the microbes could grow and/or migrate). Furthermore, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., a “mechanism to inhibit migration of microorganisms into the beverage container from the dispensing line”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Applicant further argues that claims 12-13, 25, and 27 would not be obvious in view of the Kraenzle, Roulin, and Flick references, respectively, due to the above-referenced arguments with respect to Peirsman et al. failing to teach or suggest certain features of the claimed invention. These arguments are moot in light of the above response. However, Examiner notes that the amendments have clarified a broader scope of the claims such that, upon further search and consideration, additional grounds for rejection became apparent.
Regarding the Chiusolo reference:
Applicant argues that: “the hose 48 and the second hose 54 are not fluid tightly coupled to each other, as was the case with Peirsman. Instead, the hose 48 is connected to cooling coil 26”; and “there is no teaching that the coupling 56 is "detachable". It is only stated (par. 0023) that the connections 52, 56 may be "a joint of conventional construction" which is not a teaching of detachable” (Remarks Page 21, last two paragraphs).
As with Peirsman, the below rejection under 102(a)(1) notes that the cooling coil is a component of the first dispensing line part. Furthermore, Examiner asserts that “a joint of conventional construction” would include common joining means for tubing (such as threaded adapters) that would be detachable. Examiner further notes that Chiusolo teaches a second dispensing line part having a diameter that varies from the coil (see Paragraph 0023), which further supports the use of a detachable adapter, as opposed to a permanent connection such as welding or soldering that may be used for materials of the same type. Thus, Chiusolo discloses “the first dispensing line part and the second dispensing line part fluid tightly coupled to each other with detachable coupling means” as claimed.
Applicant further argues that Chiusolo: “provides no teaching or suggestion that the hose 48 includes any feature that reduces a microorganism migration rate from the downstream flow path section into the beverage chamber”; and “provides no mechanism to inhibit migration of microorganisms into the beverage container from the dispensing line” (Remarks Page 22, first two paragraphs). Again, Examiner points to the rejection under 102(a)(1) below, which notes that the cooling coil is a component of the first dispensing line part and necessarily reduces microbial growth through refrigeration. Furthermore, it is noted again that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., a “mechanism to inhibit migration of microorganisms into the beverage container from the dispensing line”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Further still, Examiner notes that the arrangement of hose 48 and cooling coil 26 of Chiusolo inhibit microorganism migration against gravity in much the same way as the claimed invention, and a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Regarding the Bax reference:
Applicant argues that: “there is no disclosure or discussion of any feature preventing migration of micro-organisms that may be present in the first part of the dispensing line into the beverage container” (Remarks Page 23, last full paragraph). It is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., a feature preventing migration from the first part of the dispensing line) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Applicant further argues that “Bax provides no teaching or suggestion that the upstream flow path section in the first dispensing line part 11 is arranged to at least reduce a microorganism migration rate from the downstream flow path section into the beverage chamber” (Remarks Page 24, first paragraph); and “while the ball valve may prevent backflow, there is no evidence of record that the ball valve will mitigate migration of micro-organisms from the first dispensing line part into the container” (Remarks Page 24, first full paragraph). Examiner asserts that preventing flow of the beverage from the second dispensing line to the first dispensing line inhibits migration of micro-organisms by some detectable amount. Furthermore, as noted above regarding Chiusolo, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. Further still, it is noted again that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., mitigating “migration of micro-organisms from the first dispensing line part into the container”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Thus the arrangement of the first dispensing line being separated from the second dispensing line by a valve anticipates the limitation “wherein the upstream flow path section in the first dispensing line part is arranged to at least reduce a microorganism migration rate from the downstream flow path section into the beverage chamber” as claimed.
Applicant further argues that claim 21 would not be obvious in view of the Miller reference due to the above-referenced arguments with respect to Bax et al. failing to teach or suggest certain features of the claimed invention. These arguments are moot in light of the above response.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the cooling means comprising a housing defining an inner cooling chamber, at least the upstream flow path section of the dispensing line provided in the inner cooling chamber (claim 10) must be shown or the features canceled from the claims. No new matter should be entered.
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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
On page 21, line 15, “coupler 201” should read --coupler 210--.
On page 24, lines 1, 22, and 24, references to “downstream flow path” should read --upstream flow path-- for consistency (see page 3, lines 12-15).
The amendment to the Specification dated 10/21/2025 makes reference to paragraph numbers that are not present in the original filed specification.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 4, 8, and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities: each claim recites “the first and the second parts”, but should read --the first dispensing line part and the second dispensing line part-- for clarity (see claim 1 as amended in the amendment dated 10/21/2025).
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The claim limitation being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is “cooling means” in claim 9.
Examiner notes that “coupling means” in claim 1 is not recited in a form that meets the test described above, and thus will be interpreted as a structural limitation according to the broadest reasonable interpretation, as described above.
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 2, 4-8, 15-27, 30-31, 35, and 40-41 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 2, 4, 8, 16-17, 22, 24, and 40-41, each claim recites “flow of beverage” or “a beverage” after a previous recitation of “a beverage” in the respective claim or a claim on which the respective claim depends, raising the question of double inclusion and thus rendering the scope of the claim indefinite (see the amendments to claim 1 that addressed similar issues).
Regarding claim 15, the claim recites “wherein coupling means between the first dispensing line part and the second dispensing line part” in lines 2-3. It is unclear if the claim is referring to the “detachable coupling means” recited in claim 1, raising the question of double inclusion and thus rendering the scope of the claim indefinite.
Regarding claim 19, the claim is dependent upon claims 1, 4, 8, or 17, which each recite “a beverage container”, but do not recite a flexible tube. The claim recites “each further beverage container comprising a flexible tube connected to the beverage container” in lines 3-4. It is unclear if the underlined phrase is intended to refer to the beverage container of claim 1. The claim subsequently recites “the flexible tube of a container” in line 5, and “a flexible tube of a further container” in line 6. Considering that the beverage container of claim 1 was not described as having a flexible tube, it is unclear if the claim is intended to describe replacement of the beverage container of claim 1 with a further beverage container, or something different.
Regarding claim 20:
The claim recites a beverage container comprising “a container body defining a beverage chamber holding a beverage” in lines 2-3. The claim is ultimately dependent upon claims 1, 4, 8, or 17, which each previously recite “a beverage container with a container body defining a beverage chamber arranged for holding a beverage”. It is unclear if Applicant intends to recite an additional container body and a beverage, especially considering the difference between the underlined phrases.
The claim recites a beverage container comprising “a flexible tube as the first part of a dispensing line” in line 4. It is unclear if this is referring to the “first dispensing line part” of claim 1, 4, 8, or 17.
Regarding claims 22 and 24:
Each claim recites a “fluid conduit for use as a first dispensing line part in a beverage dispensing assembly according to claim 1” in lines 1-2. It is unclear if this is referring to the “first dispensing line part” in the beverage dispensing assembly of claim 1, raising the question of double inclusion and thus rendering the scope of the claim indefinite.
Claim 22 has been amended to recite “the flow path” in line 3, but claim 24 recites “a flow path” in line 3. It is unclear if either is intended to refer to the flow path recited in claim 1, raising the question of double inclusion and thus rendering the scope of the claim indefinite. For purposes of examination only, recitations of “the flow path” or “a flow path” in these claims and their dependents will be interpreted to refer to the flow path of claim 1, which includes both the upstream flow path and the downstream flow path. Accordingly, the hollow conduit body would define only a section of the flow path, and features defined by their location on the flow path would not be limited to being within the hollow conduit body.
Further, claim 24 recites “plurality of loops consecutively provided along the flow” in line 5. It is unclear if this is a typographical error (i.e., it is referring to the flow path, as in claim 22) or if the difference is intended to impact the scope of the claim.
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 1, 4-7, 9, 17, 30, and 35 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 6-9 of U.S. Patent No. 12,2914,442 by Wigman et al. (reference application, hereinafter “Wigman ’442”). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other for the reasons described below.
See the table below for cross-referencing of claim limitations disclosed or substantially disclosed by Wigman ‘442.
Claim # (dependency)
Limitations of the instant application
Limitations of ‘442 Patent
‘442 Claim # (dependency)
1, 4, and 17
a beverage container (201) with a container body (202) defining a beverage chamber arranged for holding a beverage
a beverage container (100) with a container body defining a beverage chamber (102) for containing a beverage
1
1, 4, and 17
a dispenser (230) with a dispensing opening for dispensing the beverage
a dispenser for dispensing the beverage at a dispensing outlet of the dispenser
1
1, 4, and 17
a dispensing line (220) extending between the beverage chamber and the dispensing opening to form a flow path enabling a flow of beverage from the beverage chamber to the dispensing opening
a beverage dispensing line (400) extending between the beverage container and a dispenser
1
1, 4, and 17
the dispensing line comprising a first dispensing line part (211) attached to the container body and a separate second dispensing line part (220) attached to the dispenser
the beverage dispensing line comprises a first beverage conduit (401) and a second beverage conduit (402) separate from the first beverage conduit . . . the first beverage conduit with a first end thereof connected to the beverage container . . . the second beverage conduit . . . arranged to guide flow of beverage from the coupler device to the dispenser
1
1, 4, and 17
the first and the second parts fluid tightly coupled to each other with detachable coupling means (215)
a coupler device (200) comprising a coupler housing arranged for detachable coupling to the container body and for coupling the beverage dispensing line… the first beverage conduit . . . connected to the coupler device . . . the second beverage conduit connected to the coupler device
1
4
such that the beverage container with the first dispensing line part can be removed and be replaced by a further container with a first dispensing line part
See rejection below under nonstatutory double patenting
1, 4, and 17
the first dispensing line part (211) defines an upstream flow path section for flow of beverage from the beverage chamber to the coupling means (215)
the first beverage conduit (401) with a first end thereof connected to the beverage container in fluid communication with the beverage outlet and a second end thereof connected to the coupler device (200) to form at least part of a first beverage flow path arranged to guide flow of beverage from the beverage chamber to the coupler device (200)
1
1, 4, and 17
the second dispensing line part (220) defines a downstream flow path section for flow of beverage from the coupling means (215) to the dispensing opening of the dispenser (230)
the second beverage conduit (402) connected to the coupler device (200) to form a second beverage flow path arranged to guide flow of beverage from the coupler device (200) to the dispenser
1
1, 4, and 17
wherein the upstream flow path section in the first dispensing line part is arranged to at least reduce a microorganism migration rate from the downstream flow path section into the beverage chamber.
See rejection below under nonstatutory double patenting
4-7, 30, 35 (1)
the upstream flow path section comprises a bend (214) extending downwards in a flow direction from the beverage chamber to the coupling means; wherein the bend defines an at least 360˚ degrees turn in the upstream flow path section (211); wherein the first dispensing line part (211) comprises a plurality of loops consecutively provided along the upstream flow path section; wherein the plurality of loops define a spiraling section of the flow path; wherein the bend is provided as at least one looping in the first dispensing line part.
the at least part of the first beverage conduit (401) is provided with a conduit spiral section (404) spiraling in a plane adjacent to the cooling plate cooling surface for cooling at least the conduit spiral section
(see rejection below under nonstatutory double patenting)
8 (7, 6)
9 (1)
cooling means arranged for cooling the beverage prior to dispensing thereof at the dispensing opening, wherein the cooling means are arranged for cooling at least the upstream flow path section in the first part of the dispensing line (211) such that a migration rate of microorganisms through the flow path section into the beverage container is reduced
the coupler device comprises inside the coupler housing a cooling body (cooling plate 210) arranged to thermally connect with the first beverage conduit to cool at least part of the first beverage conduit (401) when the first beverage conduit is coupled to the coupler device (see rejection below under nonstatutory double patenting)
6 (1)
17
wherein beverage is included in the container which is free of alcohol.
a beverage chamber for containing a beverage, particularly an alcohol free beverage
1
Regarding claims 1, 4, and 17, Wigman ‘442 discloses or substantially discloses each limitation of the claimed invention, as demonstrated in the table above. The statement “wherein the upstream flow path section in the first dispensing line part is arranged to at least reduce a microorganism migration rate from the downstream flow path section into the beverage chamber” merely recites an intended outcome, and presents no additional patentable structure associated with that outcome. The upstream flow path (“first beverage flow path”) of Wigman ‘442 would be equally capable of achieving this outcome, and thus no patentable distinction is present in the instant claim.
Regarding claims 4-7, 30, and 35, Wigman ‘442 substantially discloses the narrowest limitation of claim 7, a spiraling section of the upstream flow path section (“a conduit spiral section” 404 in “the at least part of the first beverage conduit” 401), thus anticipating the broader limitations in claims 4-6, 30, and 35. The differences in terminology between the applications do not appear to involve any structural differences that would create a patentable distinction in the instant claim. Further, the detachable coupling means claimed in Wigman ‘442 enable the beverage container with the first dispensing line part to be removed and replaced.
Regarding claim 9, Wigman ‘442 substantially discloses the recited cooling means (“cooling body” 210) for cooling the upstream flow path section (“at least part of the first beverage conduit” 401), but does not specify that the beverage is cooled prior to dispensing. This limitation, however, is implied in the structure, since the beverage being dispensed in the invention of Wigman ‘442 would flow through the cooled conduit prior to dispensing. Claim 7 of Wigman ‘442 also does not disclose that “a migration rate of microorganisms through the flow path section into the beverage container is reduced,” but this also would be implied, as it is commonly known that refrigeration inhibits microbial growth.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-3, 9-11, 14-20, 22, 26, 31-34, 36-37, and 40-41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Peirsman et al. (US 2019/0144253).
Regarding claim 1, Peirsman et al. disclose a beverage dispensing assembly comprising a beverage container (5) with a container body defining a beverage chamber arranged for holding a beverage (see the Abstract, Fig. 1); a dispenser with a dispensing opening for dispensing the beverage (tap 9v); and a dispensing line (dispensing tube composed of upstream dispensing tube section 3U, cartridge channel 1C, and downstream dispensing tube section 3D) extending between the beverage chamber and the dispensing opening to form a flow path enabling a flow of the beverage from the beverage chamber to the dispensing opening (Paragraphs 0053-0056), the dispensing line comprising a first dispensing line part (3U with channel 1C) attached to the container body (Fig. 1) and a separate second dispensing line part (3D) attached to the dispenser (Fig. 1), the first dispensing line part and the second dispensing line part fluid tightly coupled to each other with detachable coupling means (“the channel outlet [1o] is reversibly coupled to the proximal end of the downstream dispensing tube section”; Paragraph 0067), wherein the first dispensing line part defines an upstream flow path section for flow of the beverage from the beverage chamber to the coupling means (Paragraphs 0045-0046), and the second dispensing line part defines a downstream flow path section for flow of the beverage from the coupling means to the dispensing opening of the dispenser (Paragraph 0047), wherein the upstream flow path section in the first dispensing line part is arranged to at least reduce a microorganism migration rate from the downstream flow path section into the beverage chamber (a capability provided by the cooled serpentine path of 1C; Fig.1, Paragraphs 0043-0045; Examiner notes that refrigeration is commonly known to inhibit microbial growth).
Regarding claim 2, Peirsman et al. disclose a beverage dispensing assembly according to claim 1, including that the upstream flow path section in the first dispensing line part comprises a beverage flow channel (interior of 3U/1C) for flow of beverage through the first dispensing line part from the beverage chamber to the coupling means in a downward flow direction (according to Examiner’s best understanding, the claim merely requires a conduit that would allow a beverage to flow downward, i.e., in a direction in which flow would be assisted by gravity, and does not require a particular structural configuration).
Regarding claim 3, Peirsman et al. further disclose that the first dispensing line part can be sealingly attached to the container body (“upstream dispensing tube section permanently coupled to said keg”; Paragraph 0067) such that entry of microorganisms into the beverage chamber through an attachment interface between the container body and the first dispensing line part is prevented (this would be inherent in the disclosed configuration, especially considering that an airtight interface is required for pressurizing the container for dispensing).
Regarding claims 9-11 and 36-37, Peirsman et al. disclose a beverage dispensing assembly according to claim 1, as described above, and further disclose cooling means (cooling unit 2) arranged for cooling the beverage prior to dispensing the beverage at the dispensing opening (Paragraph 0078), wherein the cooling means are arranged for cooling at least the upstream flow path section in the first dispensing line part (channel 1C; Fig. 2) such that a migration rate of microorganisms through the flow path section into the beverage container is reduced (see above regarding claim 1). Peirsman et al. further disclose a housing defining an inner cooling chamber (slot 2S; Paragraph 0069; Fig. 4), at least the upstream flow path section of the dispensing line provided in the inner cooling chamber for cooling thereof at a temperature of the inner cooling chamber (channel 1C in contact with cooling plates 2P; Paragraph 0068).
Peirsman et al. further disclose that the cooling means are arranged to cool the upstream flow path section of the dispensing line to “a low temperature” (Paragraph 0001). Peirsman et al. note that traditional cooling means use iced water that is ” limited to zero degree Celsius (0°C)” (Paragraph 0005) and that “Any type of cold source known in the art can be used” in the disclosed invention (Paragraph 0052). Thus, the cooling means disclosed by Peirsman et al. would include arrangements capable of cooling the upstream flow path section of the dispensing line to 6°C or below, 4°C or lower, or to between 0°C - 3°C.
Regarding claims 14-15, Peirsman et al. disclose a beverage dispensing assembly according to claim 1, as described above, and further disclose that the first dispensing line part can be preassembled to the container body (“upstream dispensing tube section permanently coupled to said keg”; Paragraph 0067) with a coupling separate from the coupling to the second dispensing line part (see Fig. 2; coupling of 3Up to container 5 is different from coupling of 3Dp to 1o). The permanent coupling of the first dispensing line part to the container would also prevent a direct coupling of the second dispensing line part to the container body.
Regarding claim 16, Peirsman et al. disclose a beverage dispensing assembly according to claim 1, as described above, and further disclose that said assembly is intended for use with “a beverage such as a beer or other carbonated beverages which are to be served at a low temperature” (Paragraph 0001) and, more specifically, that such beverages include “malt based beverages, such as beer, or any soda” (Paragraph 0002). Thus, the beverage container is disclosed to contain a beverage having an alcohol by volume percentage of 2 % or less.
Regarding claim 17-18 and 31, Peirsman et al. disclose a beverage dispensing assembly having all of the recited features, as described above regarding claim 1.
Peirsman et al. further disclose that said assembly is intended for use with “a beverage such as a beer or other carbonated beverages which are to be served at a low temperature” (Paragraph 0001) and, more specifically, that such beverages include “malt based beverages, such as beer, or any soda” (Paragraph 0002). Thus, the beverage container of Peirsman et al. could include a beer or cider that is free of alcohol, or an alcohol-free malt beverage.
Regarding claims 19-20, Peirsman et al. disclose a beverage dispensing assembly according to claim 1, as described above, and further disclose a system including further beverage containers, each further beverage container comprising a flexible tube connected to the beverage container (container and first dispensing line part 3U/1C can be replaced together; Paragraph 0063-0067), each flexible tube being arranged for forming the first dispensing line part when coupled to the second dispensing line part (at least 1C is disclosed as being flexible, Paragraph 0043), such that the flexible tube of a container can be uncoupled from said second dispensing line part and a flexible tube of a further container can be coupled to the second dispensing line part (via reversible coupling at 1o; see Fig. 2(a); Paragraph 0067).
Peirsman et al. further disclose that the first dispensing line part has one end sealingly attached to the container body such that the beverage can flow from the beverage chamber into the flexible tube while entry of microorganisms into the beverage chamber through an attachment interface between the container body and the flexible tube is prevented (for example, 3U can be permanently attached to container; Paragraph 0066), and an opposite end of the flexible tube arranged for coupling to the second dispensing line part (via reversible coupling at 1o; see Fig. 2(a); Paragraph 0067).
Regarding claims 22 and 26, Peirsman et al. disclose a fluid conduit (upstream dispensing tube section 3U with cartridge channel 1C) for use as a first dispensing line part in a beverage dispensing assembly according to claim 1, comprising a hollow conduit body defining the flow path for flow of beverage through the hollow conduit body between one end of the conduit body and an opposite end of the conduit body, wherein the flow path is provided with a plurality of loops consecutively provided along the flow path (Paragraphs 0053-0055, channel 1C forms “a serpentine extending in a non-rectilinear trajectory”; See Figs. 5-6). Peirsman et al. further disclose that the hollow conduit body is formed by a tube (Paragraphs 0053-0055, “a dispensing tube”) having a length of at least 5 cm (it is readily apparent from Figs. 1 and 5 that the combined length of 3U and 1C must be greater than 5 cm).
Regarding claims 32-34 and 40-41, Peirsman et al. disclose a beverage dispensing assembly according to claim 1, and further disclose that said assembly is intended for use with “a beverage such as a beer or other carbonated beverages which are to be served at a low temperature” (Paragraph 0001) and, more specifically, that such beverages include “malt based beverages, such as beer, or any soda” (Paragraph 0002). Thus, the beverage container of Peirsman et al. could include an alcohol-free beer or a beverage having an alcohol by volume percentage of 0.5% or less. Peirsman et al. further discloses that the dispenser comprises a faucet with a tapping handle (9, Fig. 1).
Claims 1-3, 9-11, 22-23, 26, 34, and 36-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chiusolo et al. (US 2007/0051125).
Regarding claim 1, Chiusolo et al. disclose a beverage dispensing assembly comprising a beverage container (14) with a container body defining a beverage chamber arranged for holding a beverage (see the Abstract, Fig. 1); a dispenser with a dispensing opening for dispensing the beverage (tap 32); and a dispensing line (conduit 24) extending between the beverage chamber and the dispensing opening to form a flow path enabling a flow of the beverage from the beverage chamber to the dispensing opening (Paragraph 0027), the dispensing line comprising a first dispensing line part (first hose portion 48 with coil 26) attached to the container body (Fig. 1) and a separate second dispensing line part (second hose portion 54) attached to the dispenser (Fig. 2), the first dispensing line part and the second dispensing line part fluid tightly coupled to each other with detachable coupling means (connection 56), wherein the first dispensing line part defines an upstream flow path section (from 14 to 56) for flow of the beverage from the beverage chamber to the coupling means, and the second dispensing line part defines a downstream flow path section (from 56 to 32) for flow of the beverage from the coupling means to the dispensing opening of the dispenser, wherein the upstream flow path section in the first dispensing line part is arranged to at least reduce a microorganism migration rate from the downstream flow path section into the beverage chamber (via cooling of coil 26 in inner chamber 4; Paragraphs 0024, 0027).
Regarding claim 2, Chiusolo et al. further disclose that the upstream flow path section in the first dispensing line part comprises a beverage flow channel (interior of 48 and 26) for flow of beverage through the first dispensing line part from the beverage chamber to the coupling means in a downward flow direction (e.g., see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 3, Chiusolo et al. further disclose that the first dispensing line part can be sealingly attached to the container body (via pump 12) such that entry of microorganisms into the beverage chamber through an attachment interface between the container body and the first dispensing line part is prevented (this would be inherent in the disclosed configuration, especially considering that an airtight interface is required for pressurizing the container for dispensing).
Regarding claims 9-11, Chiusolo et al. further disclose cooling means (refrigeration means 20) arranged for cooling the beverage prior to dispensing the beverage at the dispensing opening (Fig. 2), wherein the cooling means are arranged for cooling at least the upstream flow path section in the first dispensing line part (coil 26 is cooled; Paragraph 0024) such that a migration rate of microorganisms through the flow path section into the beverage container is reduced (a capability provided by the cooled coil arranged at the bottom of the device; Examiner notes that refrigeration is commonly known to inhibit microbial growth).
Chiusolo et al. further disclose that the cooling means comprise a housing (2) defining an inner cooling chamber (4), at least the upstream flow path section of the dispensing line provided in the inner cooling chamber for cooling thereof at a temperature of the inner cooling chamber (“coil 26 is located in the housing such that it may be submerged in a coolant fluid”; Paragraph 0022, Fig. 3).
Chiusolo et al. further disclose that “the coolant fluid is water and is used in conjunction with ice as the refrigeration means” (Paragraph 0024), thus the cooling means are arranged to cool the upstream flow path section of the dispensing line to a temperature approaching 0°C (or at least capable of being less than 6°C).
Regarding claims 22-23 and 26, Chiusolo et al. disclose a beverage dispensing assembly according to claim 1, as described above, including a fluid conduit used as a first dispensing line part (first hose portion 48 with coil 26) comprising a hollow conduit body (Paragraph 0023 references diameters of 48 and 26) defining the flow path for flow of beverage through the hollow conduit body between one end of the conduit body (at container 14, see Fig. 1) and an opposite end of the conduit body (at connection 56, see Fig. 2), wherein the flow path is provided with a plurality of loops consecutively provided along the flow path (coil 26, Fig. 3). Said plurality of loops are provided as a spiraling section of the flow path (see Fig. 3) having a length of at least 5 cm (it is readily apparent from Figs. 2 and 3 that the combined length of 48 and 26 must be greater than 5 cm).
Regarding claim 34, Chiusolo et al. disclose a beverage dispensing assembly according to claim 1, and further disclose that the dispenser comprises a faucet with a tapping handle (32; see Fig. 2).
Regarding claims 36-37, Chiusolo et al. disclose a beverage dispensing assembly according to claim 9, and further disclose that the cooling means are arranged to cool the upstream flow path section of the dispensing line to a temperature of 4°C or lower, or to between 0°C - 3°C (“refrigeration means 20 is preferably ice”; Paragraph 0019; ice would inherently be capable of cooling to approximately 0°C).
Claims 1-4, 8, 12-27, 31-34, and 40-41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bax et al. (US 2010/0243676).
Regarding claim 1, Bax et al. disclose a beverage dispensing assembly (see the embodiment of Figs. 2 and 6) comprising a beverage container (2) with a container body defining a beverage chamber (inside space 16) arranged for holding a beverage (beverage 18, Fig. 2); a dispenser with a dispensing opening for dispensing the beverage (tapping cock 4); and a dispensing line (coupling element 11 and tapping line 12) extending between the beverage chamber and the dispensing opening to form a flow path enabling a flow of the beverage from the beverage chamber to the dispensing opening (Paragraph 0045), the dispensing line comprising a first dispensing line part (11) attached to the container body (Fig. 2) and a separate second dispensing line part (12) attached to the dispenser (Fig. 6), the first dispensing line part and the second dispensing line part fluid tightly coupled to each other with detachable coupling means (23 and 24), wherein the first dispensing line part defines an upstream flow path section for flow of the beverage from the beverage chamber to the coupling means (Paragraph 0045), and the second dispensing line part defines a downstream flow path section for flow of the beverage from the coupling means to the dispensing opening of the dispenser (Paragraph 0045), wherein the upstream flow path section in the first dispensing line part is arranged to at least reduce a microorganism migration rate from the downstream flow path section into the beverage chamber (coupling means 23 includes ball valve preventing backflow; Paragraph 0057, Figs. 10-11D).
Regarding claim 2, Bax et al. further disclose that the upstream flow path section in the first dispensing line part comprises a beverage flow channel (interior of 11) for flow of beverage through the first dispensing line part from the beverage chamber to the coupling means in a downward flow direction (see Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 3, Bax et al. further disclose that the first dispensing line part can be sealingly attached to the container body (via connecting device 6) such that entry of microorganisms into the beverage chamber through an attachment interface between the container body and the first dispensing line part is prevented (this would be inherent in the disclosed configuration, especially considering that an airtight interface is required for pressurizing the container for dispensing).
Regarding claim 4, Bax et al. disclose all of the features of the claimed beverage dispensing assembly, as described above regarding claim 1, and further disclose that: the beverage container with the first dispensing line part can be removed and be replaced by a further container with a first dispensing line part (Paragraphs 0039, 0072); and the upstream flow path section comprises a bend extending downwards in a flow direction from the beverage chamber to the coupling means (see Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 8, Bax et al. disclose all of the features of the claimed beverage dispensing assembly, as described above regarding claim 1, and further disclose that the upstream flow path section comprises a yeast trap (cleaning element 21, which would trap yeast and other contaminants as it travels through the dispensing line; see Paragraphs 0045-0046; the ball valve of coupling means 23 additionally acts as a yeast trap, since it provides a structure where yeast could accumulate during subsequent dispensing; see Figs. 10-11D). Considering that no particular structure is defined in the claims or illustrated in the drawings with respect to a "yeast trap," Examiner's best understanding is that any structure providing "a further barrier in the upstream flow path section particularly against yeast for migrating into the beverage chamber" (as defined in Paragraph 0019 of the amendment to the specification dated 10/21/2025) would satisfy the limitation requiring a yeast trap.
Regarding claims 12-13, Bax et al. disclose a beverage dispensing assembly according to claim 1, as described above, and further disclose that the first dispensing line part comprises a flexible tube (coupling element 11 includes tube 19, Fig. 2; “tube 19 is connected, preferably somewhat flexibly,” Paragraph 0040), the flexible tube arranged in a bend extending downwards in a flow direction from the beverage chamber to the coupling means (see Fig. 1). Bax et al. further disclose that the flexible tube is attached with one end to the container body and at an opposite end is arranged for coupling to the second dispensing line part (see Fig. 1).
Regarding claims 14-15, Bax et al. disclose a beverage dispensing assembly according to claim 1, as described above, and further disclose that the first dispensing line part can be preassembled to the container body (Paragraphs 0039, 0045) with a coupling separate from the coupling to the second dispensing line part (see Fig. 2; coupling of 11 to 2 is different from coupling of 11 to 12). The preassembled coupling of the first dispensing line part to the container (see Fig. 2) would also prevent a direct coupling of the second dispensing line part to the container body.
Regarding claims 16 and 32-33, Bax et al. disclose a beverage dispensing assembly according to claim 1, as described above, and further disclose that said assembly is intended for use with “carbonated beverage and/or beverage with natural ingredients, such as beer” (Paragraph 0001). Thus, the beverage container is disclosed to contain a beverage having an alcohol by volume percentage of 2 % or less, as well as an alcohol free beverage, as well as an alcohol free beer.
Regarding claims 17-18, 31, and 40-41, Bax et al. disclose a beverage dispensing assembly having all of the recited features, as described above regarding claim 1, and further disclose that said assembly is intended for use with “carbonated beverage and/or beverage with natural ingredients, such as beer” (Paragraph 0001). Thus, the beverage container is disclosed to contain a beverage that is free of alcohol, as well as beer (a malt beverage which would encompass the claimed alcohol by volume percentages).
Regarding claim 19, Bax et al. disclose a beverage dispensing assembly according to claim 1, as described above, and further disclose a system including further beverage containers (“a tapping device can also comprise multiple beverage containers”; Paragraph 0072), each further beverage container comprising a flexible tube connected to the beverage container (Paragraph 0045), each flexible tube being arranged for forming the first dispensing line part when coupled to the second dispensing line part (Paragraph 0045), such that the flexible tube of a container can be uncoupled from said second dispensing line part and a flexible tube of a further container can be coupled to the second dispensing line part (container and/or coupling element may be replaced, Paragraph 0072).
Regarding claims 20-21, Bax et al. disclose a beverage dispensing assembly according to claim 1, as described above, including a beverage container (2) comprising a container body defining a beverage chamber (inside space 16) holding a beverage (18) and comprising a flexible tube (coupling element 11 includes tube 19, Fig. 2; “tube 19 is connected, preferably somewhat flexibly,” Paragraph 0040) as the first part of a dispensing line, with one end sealingly attached to the container body such that the beverage can flow from the beverage chamber into the flexible tube (via second passage 17 of coupling element 11, Paragraph 0040; Fig. 2) while entry of microorganisms into the beverage chamber through an attachment interface between the container body and the flexible tube is prevented (capability implied by the air/fluid-tight attachment of 11 to 2, allowing pressurization of the container), and an opposite end of the flexible tube arranged for coupling to the second dispensing line part (“free end 22 of the hose or tube 19 is provided with a first coupling means 23 that can cooperate with a second coupling means 24 at the corresponding end 25 of the tapping line 12,” Paragraph 0040). Bax et al. further disclose that the container body and the flexible tube are preassembled (Paragraph 0039) with the opposite end of the flexible tube (23) closed off with a removable seal (21) prior to use (Paragraph 0054; see Figs. 10-11D).
Regarding claims 22-27, Bax et al. disclose a fluid conduit (11) for use as a first dispensing line part in a beverage dispensing assembly according to claim 1, comprising a hollow conduit body (19) defining the flow path for flow of beverage through the hollow conduit body between one end of the conduit body and an opposite end of the conduit body (see Figs. 1 and 10), wherein the flow path is provided with a plurality of loops (14) consecutively provided along the flow path (see interpretation regarding claims 22 and 24 in the associated rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b)), wherein the loops are provided as a spiraling section of the flow path (see Fig. 1), and wherein the flow path comprises a yeast trap (21 and/or the ball valve of 23; see above regarding claim 8).
Bax et al. further disclose that the flow path is provided with a valve arranged to restrict passage of microorganisms through the flow path (ball valve of 23; see above regarding claim 1), that the hollow conduit body is formed by a tube having a length of at least 5 cm (it is apparent from Figs. 1 and 10 that tube 19 is at least 5 cm in length), and that both ends of the conduit body are provided with a seal for sealing the flow path prior to use (one end being attached to connecting device 6 and the opposite end being sealed by 21; see Paragraph 0054).
Regarding claim 34, Bax et al. disclose a beverage dispensing assembly according to claim 1, and further disclose that the dispenser comprises a faucet with a tapping handle (13 and 4; see Fig. 1).
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.
Claims 5-7, 28-30, 35, and 38-39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bax et al. in view of Chiusolo et al.
Regarding claims 5-7, Bax et al. disclose the beverage dispensing assembly according to claim 4, but do not disclose that the bend defines an at least 360 degrees turn in the upstream flow path section. Instead, Bax et al. disclose an inline cooler formed by a spiraling section in the downstream flow path section (see 14 in Fig. 1).
Chiusolo et al. teach a first dispensing line part with an upstream flow path section (48 with 26) having a bend extending downwards (see Fig. 2) that continues to extend such that it defines an at least 360 degrees turn (according to Examiner’s best understanding; see Response to Arguments regarding claim 5). The first dispensing line part further comprises a plurality of loops consecutively provided along the upstream flow path section, which define a spiraling section of the flow path (coil 26 necessarily includes at least one 360 degrees turn, and is illustrated with a plurality of layers, i.e., loops, with the loops progressing in a vertical direction, i.e., spiraling). Chiusolo et al. teach this configuration for inline cooling of the upstream flow path.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the assembly of Bax et al. such that the bend defines a plurality of loops defining a spiraling section of the flow path, as taught by Chiusolo et al., in order to provide cooling for the upstream flow path. Considering that Bax et al. has already disclosed such a configuration as an inline cooler in the downstream flow path, one having ordinary skill in the art would find it to be an obvious matter of design choice to rearrange this feature in the upstream flow path instead, as it does not appear to have a significant impact on the dispensing functions of the assembly. One having ordinary skill in the art may be motivated to do so based on convenience or space limitations (i.e., it may be more appropriate to have the coupling means located closer to the dispenser, or to have the inline cooler located closer to the beverage container, e.g., on the floor). Bax et al. teaches that the coupling means contain a cleaning element that travels toward the dispenser, but also notes that cooled sections of the flow path require less cleaning “because growth of bacteria is virtually prevented” (Paragraph 0043), so moving the cooler to the upstream side of the cleaning element would appear to have little impact on the cleaning function as well.
Regarding claims 28-29 and 38-39, Bax et al. disclose the beverage dispensing assembly according to claim 1, wherein the first dispensing line part comprises a flexible tube arranged in a bend extending downwards in a flow direction from the beverage chamber to the coupling means (see the above rejection of claim 12 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)), but do not disclose that the bend defines an at least 360 degrees turn in the upstream flow path section. Instead, Bax et al. disclose an inline cooler formed by at least one looping in the downstream flow path section (see 14 in Fig. 1).
As described above regarding claims 5-7, Chiusolo et al. teach a first dispensing line part with an inline cooler including an upstream flow path section having a bend extending downwards that continues to extend such that it defines an at least 360 degrees turn and is provided as at least one looping in the upstream flow path section.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the assembly of Bax et al. with arrangement taught by Chiusolo et al., for the reasons described above regarding claims 5-7. When modifying the assembly of Bax et al. in this way, the 360 degrees turn and looping would be made in the flexible tube that makes up the first dispensing line part, thus arriving at the claimed invention.
Regarding claims 30 and 35, Bax et al., modified in view of Chiusolo et al. as described above, renders obvious the beverage dispensing assembly of claim 5, and further teaches that the bend is provided as a looping in the first dispensing line part (i.e., the plurality of loops consecutively provided along the upstream flow path section described above regarding claims 5-7), thus meeting the limitations of claims 30 and 35.
Claims 8 and 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peirsman et al. in view of Roulin et al. (US 8,696,899).
Regarding claim 8, Peirsman et al. disclose all the features of the beverage dispensing assembly of claim 8, as described above in the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1), except that the upstream flow path section comprises a yeast trap.
Roulin et al. teach a beverage dispenser (Col. 1, lines 4-5) with a filter (bacterial filter 5) provided in the flow path (Fig. 1) arranged to restrict passage of microorganisms through the flow path (“a filter which is capable of physically obstructing the passage of bacteria in water flowing through it,” Col. 3, lines 53-55).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to provide the fluid conduit of Peirsman et al. with the filter taught by Roulin et al. in order to obstruct the passage of bacteria flowing through the conduit. Such a filter would also inherently provide a barrier that would trap yeast, and thus, according to Examiner’s best understanding, would be considered a yeast trap.
Regarding claims 24-25, Peirsman et al. disclose all the features of the fluid conduit of claim 24, as described above in the rejection of claim 22 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1), except that the flow path comprises a yeast trap.
When Peirsman et al. is modified in view of Roulin et al., as described above regarding claim 8, the flow path would comprise a yeast trap. As noted above, the yeast trap taught by Roulin et al. is a filter arranged to restrict passage of microorganisms through the flow path. Thus, modification of the fluid conduit of Peirsman et al. in view of Roulin et al. would meet the limitations of both claims 24 and 25.
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peirsman et al. in view of Flick et al. (US 2018/0192813).
Peirsman et al. disclose a fluid conduit according to claim 22, as described above in the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1). Peirsman et al. do not disclose that both ends of the conduit body are provided with a seal for sealing the flow path prior to use.
Flick et al. teach a beverage preparation apparatus (see the Abstract) including a fluid connector (28) inside a housing (34; see Paragraph 0070) that is sealed at both ends (Paragraph 0044), creating an aseptic condition free of microorganisms (Paragraph 0043) until the seal is broken for use of the device (Paragraph 0082).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to provide both ends of the conduit body of Peirsman et al. with seals, as taught by Flick et al., in order to prevent contamination of the interior of the tube prior to connection in the beverage dispensing assembly.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 form.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL C PATTERSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5558. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4:00 CST.
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, Paul Durand can be reached at 571-272-4459. 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.
/MICHAEL C PATTERSON/Examiner, Art Unit 3754
/PAUL R DURAND/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3754 January 23, 2026