DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on or after August 28, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1-5 and 7-14 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to claims 1, 3, 4, 7 and 11 have been fully considered. Claim 6 is canceled by the applicant. In response to the applicant’s arguments and amendments, a more detailed action and references are provided.
Response to Arguments
The arguments filed August 28, 2025 have been fully considered, but they are not fully persuasive. Regarding the applicant’s arguments that:
The Amendments to the claims overcome the previously set forth 112b rejection: The examiner agrees. The rejection in view of 112b is subsequently withdrawn.
Star has no suggestion or disclosure in Star of the type of beverage maker recited in Claim and in particular that the plurality of different delivery points are used for delivery of different beverage types and does not teach separate delivery points for different beverage components: While the examiner appreciates the applicant’s argument, the application of the separate food lines with different beverages, as set forth in the previous office action is interpreted as intended use and does not further limit the claim. However, the prior art does teach separate delivery connection points for different beverage components (the prior art of Star presents an “improved…locking mechanism for a “removable filter carrier” [0011] a “filter carrier projections [that] are compatible” with different beverage components such as “a receiver secured or integral with the beverage maker” [0013]).
Start does not teach a separate brewing unit with separate food lines connected to the outlet device: The examiner respectfully disagrees. Star teaches a brewing unit situated above the outlet device (Shown in Star Figure 2 as annotated) and further teaches that the separated food lines (the prior art discloses that the “showerhead comprises a number of plates or members that funnel or otherwise direct fluid…” from the brewing unit into the shower head [0039] and serve as separate food lines which reads on the limitations of the claims as written) which connect the brewing unit (as shown in figure 1) to the outlet device (“shower head” [0041] Figure 5 Element 40).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-5, 7-11, and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Star et al (US Pub. No. 2011/0223302A1) in view of Van et al (CA 2789657C):
PNG
media_image1.png
822
1002
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
677
768
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
510
728
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 1: Star teaches a beverage maker (“beverage maker” [0034] Figure 2 All Elements), a brewing apparatus (The prior art discloses that the “subject beverage maker may be a drip coffee maker” [0019] which would be recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art to be a brewing apparatus), an outlet device (“shower head” [0041] Figure 5 Element 40) which is connected to the brewing apparatus via a hot- beverage line (regarding the connection, the prior art teaches that the “showerhead may be integral to the beverage maker [mounted]…via fasteners” [0041] which reads on the limitation of the claim),separate food lines connected to the outlet device ( the prior art discloses that the “showerhead comprises a number of plates or members that funnel or otherwise direct fluid…” [0039] which serve as separate food lines for the present invention which read on the limitations of the claims), the preceding limitation is interpreted as intended use and does not further limit the structure of the claim),at least one outlet head (“outlet” [0041] Figure 5 Element 44), which is securable on the outlet device and is configured for dispensing one or more beverage components which are guided to the outlet device via the hot-beverage line and the separate food lines (the preceding limitations are interpreted as intended use and does not further limit the structure of the claim) ,the outlet device has a mechanical interface (“locking mechanism” Figure 3 Elements 50, 55, 52, 54, 56, and 58) via which the outlet head is sealingly coupled thereon, the mechanical interface has a plurality of beverage component delivery connection points for different beverage components, the outlet head has a sealing surface that is sealingly coupled thereagainst to the mechanical interface (the prior art discloses that the invention contains “seal[ing] surface[s] [that seal] the opening access [points]” [0050] Figure 3 Element 58), the sealing surface has corresponding openings (“opening access [points] [0050]) that correspond to less than a total number of the plurality of beverage component delivery connection points, and the sealing surface in a coupled-on state of the outlet head closes a remaining number of the plurality of beverage component delivery connection points (the art discloses a plurality of “fasteners” which serve as connection points [ 0040]in a fluid-tight manner (the prior art discloses that the invention contains “seal[ing] surface[s] [that seal] the opening access [points]” [0050] Figure 3 Element 58).
Star et al does not explicitly teach that the beverage apparatus contains a water heater
However, Van et al. does teach that the beverage apparatus contains a water heater (a “heating device” which heats water for the “brewing device” Pg. 7 Lines 27-30)
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to modify the invention of Star with the water heater of Van given that the use of a water heater is well known in the prior art to produce “heated water” (Page 7 Line 27) and produce a hot beverage.
Regarding Claim 2: Star et al. teaches the beverage maker, wherein the mechanical interface comprises a linear guide configured for pushing in the outlet head (The prior art teaches a linear guide is shown in Figure 3 Elements 54-56). All of the limitations of Claim 2 are taught by Star et al.
Regarding Claim 3: Star et al. further teaches that the mechanical interface further comprises an operating lever (“lever” [0019] which is configured to press the outlet head via a pressing mechanism (“locking mechanism” which presses the components of the apparatus [0018]) against a sealing surface of the outlet device provided with the plurality of beverage component delivery connection points (a plurality of “fasteners” which serve as connection points [ 0040]). All of the limitations of Claim 3 are taught by Star et al.
Regarding Claim 4: Star et al as modified by Van further teaches the limitations of Claim 1 on which Claim 4 depends and that the mechanical interface comprises a motor (Van “motor” Pg 7 Line 24) which is actuated via an operating element and which, upon actuation, is configured to press the outlet head against a sealing surface of the outlet device provided with a plurality of connection points (Star teaches a plurality of “fasteners” which serve as connection points [ 0040])
Regarding Claim 5: Star et al as modified by Van further teaches that the mechanical interface comprises a rotary fastening configured for coupling on the outlet head (Van “The coffee bean packing cartridge should be inserted into the recess such that the bayonet elements are inserted into the openings and the rotated in order to be connected to the coffee brewing apparatus” Pg 5 Lines 1-5 which reads on the limitations of the claim)
Regarding Claim 7: Star et al. further teaches that the individual connection points are each provided with a seal (the prior art discloses that the invention contains “seal[ing] surface[s] [that seal each of] the opening access [points]” [0050] as well as corresponding connection points (Star teaches a plurality of “fasteners” which serve as connection points [ 0040] All of the limitations of Claim 7 are taught by Star et al.
Regarding Claim 8: Van et al further teaches that the beverage maker, wherein the outlet device has a heater configured for warming up the outlet device (“the brewing device is brewing coffee based on the ground coffee and heated water heated by a heating device of the coffee brewing apparatus” Page 7 Lines 26-29) and the outlet head coupled thereon (The “outlet” head is coupled to the heater and the beverage maker in order to dispense the beverage which reads on the limitations of the claims Page 6 Line 30). All of the limitations of Claim 8 are taught by Star et al.
Regarding Claim 9: Van et al teaches a beverage maker wherein the outlet head is provided with an identifier which is readable in a contactless manner (“barcode or RFID” reader which serves as an identifier readable in a contactless manner) and which identifies beverage types which are dispensable via the outlet head (barcode or RFID reader further identifies the type of beverage to be dispensed), and the outlet device has a reader for reading the identifier (The prior art discloses “The brewing apparatus comprises a control unit…preferably a microprocessor…connected to a sensor acting as a detection means for detecting an identification element such as a barcode or a RFID label…which also receive[[s] beverage cartridge and] information about its contents” which reads on the limitations of the claims Pg 23 Lines 12-20).
Regarding Claim 10: Star et al further teaches that the beverage maker further comprising a controller and a user interface connected for signal transmission to the controller, via which different beverages or beverage variants are selectable (“beverage maker has a front face including controls” [0033] Figure 1 Element 16 which serves as a user interface that transmit signals to the controller which has the capacity to facilitate different settings for different beverage variants), the controller is configured to initiate an automatic dispensing of a selected beverage or a selected beverage variant by the beverage maker (the controller, in the prior art, initiates the automatic dispensing of the beverage [0033]), and the controller cooperates with the reader in order to offer only those beverages or beverage variants for selection which are dispensable via the coupled-on outlet head, via a graphical user interface as a function of the identifier read by the reader (The latter limitations are intended use and do not further limit the structure of the claims. They are also rejected under 112b see above). All of the limitations of Claim 10 are taught by Star et al.
Regarding Claim 11: Star et al. further teaches that the outlet head is configured as a portafilter, an upper face thereof being formed by a sealing surface which is provided with the plurality if beverage component delivery connection openings and which is otherwise closed ( the prior art discloses that the “showerhead comprises a number of plates or members that funnels or otherwise directs fluid into carrier reservoir” [0039] which are shown to be configured as a portafilter with an upper face which additionally contain “seal[ing] surface[s] [that seal] the opening access [points]” [0050] Figure 3 Element 58 which reads on the limitations of the claim). All limitations of Claim 11 are taught by Star et al.
Regarding Claim 13: Star et al as modified by Van further teaches that the rotary fastening comprises a bayonet closure (Van “bayonet elements are inserted into the opening and rotated in order to be connected [and achieve closure]” Page 6 Line 2-5 which reads on the limitation of the claim).
Regarding Claim 14: Star et al as modified by Van does not teach that the beverage maker, wherein the identifier comprises an RFID tag (Van discloses “The brewing apparatus comprises a control unit…preferably a microprocessor…connected to a sensor acting as a detection means for detecting an identification element such as a barcode or a RFID label…which also receive[[s] beverage cartridge and] information about its contents” which reads on the limitations of the claim Pg 23 Lines 12-20).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the invention of Star et al. with the RFID tag identifier taught by Van et al to increase the ease of use of the invention and automate the process of brewing different types of beverages.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Star et al (US Pub. No. 2011/0223302A1) and Van et al (CA 2789657C) in further in view of Fogagnolo (US Patent No. 6,862978 B1):
PNG
media_image4.png
790
756
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 12: Star et al as modified by Van et al does not teach that the beverage maker comprises a plurality of outlet heads
However, Fogagnolo does teach that a beverage maker further comprises a plurality of the outlet heads for different beverages or sets of beverages which are alternately couplable onto the outlet device (Figure 4 Element 40).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art to modify the invention of Star as modified by Van to include a plurality of outlet heads as taught by Fogagnolo in order to better facilitate the preparation of different beverages and provide separate “delivery groups” Col 1 Line 11 in a single, space saving machine.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SOLAN OLIVA whose telephone number is (571-)272-2518. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:00-3:00.
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) 270-8241. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-270-5569.
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.
/SOLAN OLIVA/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/IBRAHIME A ABRAHAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761