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 1-7 and 10-11 in the reply filed on September 15th, 2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 8, 9, and 12-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on September 15th, 2025.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed on December 22nd, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1-7, 10-11, and 21-24 remain pending in the application. Claims 8-9, and 12-20 have been withdrawn from consideration.
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 1-5, 10, and 21-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daniels (EP Patent No. 1475024) in view of Jackson (US Patent No. 20100282829) and further in view of Melzer (US Patent No. 20130233890).
Regrading Claim 1, Daniels teaches an apparatus for preparing foam (Paragraph 1, The present invention relates to a beverage mixer), the apparatus comprising: a container comprising an open end and a closed end (Figure 2-4, Showcases open and closed end of the container 14), the container comprising a wall defining an interior configured to contain the foam therein (Figure 2-4, Container 14 is designed to hold liquids and can hold foam).
Daniels fails to teach a spout extending from the container, the spout configured to dispense the foam, the spout comprising a top surface positioned adjacent to an opening of the wall of the container such that the foam from the interior is configured to flow along the top surface of the spout, wherein the spout comprises a plurality of slots positioned through [[a]]the top surface of the spout such that at least a portion of the foam flowing along the top surface of the spout is configured to pass through the plurality of slots..
Jackson teaches a spout (Figure 5, Spout 32) extending from the container (Figure 5, Container 30 has a Spout 32), the spout configured to dispense the foam (Figure 5 and Abstract, Container 30 Dispenses liquids), the spout comprising a top surface positioned adjacent to an opening of the wall of the container (Figure 5, the Spout has a top surface adjacent to an opening of the container wall) such that the foam from the interior is configured to flow along the top surface of the spout (Figure 5, Liquid flows on top of the Spout 32 surface),
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Daniels to incorporate a spout as stated in Jackson. The spout can be adjusted to various position between fully closed to fully opened to control flow (Paragraph 37, Spout).
Daniels in view of Jackson fails to teach that the spout comprises a plurality of slots positioned through the top surface of the spout such that at least a portion of the foam flowing along the top surface of the spout is configured to pass through the plurality of slots.
Melzer teaches a beverage dispenser with a spout (Abstract, Beverage Dispenser with a Spout) wherein the spout comprises a plurality of slots positioned through the top surface of the spout (Figure 1, Filter 10 has apertures 34) such that at least a portion of the foam flowing along the top surface of the spout is configured to pass through the plurality of slots (Figure 1 and 6 and Paragraph 30, Liquid passes through Apertures 34 and into interior cavity 18).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Daniels in view of Jackson to incorporate a spout that has a plurality of slots as stated in Melzer. The spout has apertures that helps filter out food particles (Paragraph 30, Filter).
Regrading Claim 2, Daniels in view of Jackson and Melzer teaches an apparatus for preparing foam further comprising a blending mechanism (Daniels: Figure 2, Mixing Assembly 38).
Regrading Claim 3, Daniels in view of Jackson and Melzer teaches that the blending mechanism comprises one or more blades (Daniels: Figure 2, Mixing Assembly 38 has multiple Blades 42).
Regrading Claim 4, Daniels in view of Jackson and Melzer teaches that the blending mechanism comprises a whisk (Daniels: Figure 2, Stir Stick can function as a Wisk).
Regrading Claim 5, Daniels in view of Jackson and Melzer teaches that the spout opens and closes an opening through a side wall of the container (Daniels: Figure 2, Spout 80 with handle 84 opens and closes hole in side of container 14).
Regrading Claim 10, Daniels in view of Jackson and Melzer teaches that the spout extends near the closed end of the container (Daniels: Figure 2, Spout 80 is near the bottom of container 14).
Regrading Claim 21, Daniels in view of Melzer fails to teach that the spout is configured to move between an open position and a closed position.
Jackson teaches a spout (Figure 5, Spout 32) that is configured to move between an open position and a closed position (Paragraph 37, The spout can be adjusted to various position between fully closed to fully opened to control flow).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Daniels in view of Melzer to incorporate a closeable spout as stated in Jackson. The spout can be adjusted to various position between fully closed to fully opened to control flow (Paragraph 37, Spout).
Regrading Claim 22, Daniels in view of Melzer fails to teach that in the closed position, the top surface of the spout is a portion of the wall that defines the interior of the container.
Jackson teaches a spout (Figure 5, Spout 32) that in the closed position, the top surface of the spout is a portion of the wall that defines the interior of the container (Figure 3-5, The Top Surface of Spout 32 is a part of the wall of the Container).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Daniels in view of Melzer to incorporate a closeable spout as stated in Jackson. The spout can be adjusted to various position between fully closed to fully opened to control flow (Paragraph 37, Spout).
Regrading Claim 23, Daniels in view of Melzer fails to teach that the spout rotates away to open an opening in the wall of the container to the open position, wherein the spout rotates towards the container to seal the opening of the wall of the container to the closed position.
Jackson teaches a spout (Figure 5, Spout 32) that rotates away to open an opening in the wall of the container to the open position (Paragraph 37 and Figure 3-5, The spout can be adjusted to various positions and opens by rotating away from an opening in the wall of the container), wherein the spout rotates towards the container to seal the opening of the wall of the container to the closed position (Paragraph 37-40 and Figure 3-5, The spout can be adjusted to various positions and closes by rotating towards the opening in the wall of the container).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Daniels in view of Melzer to incorporate a closeable spout as stated in Jackson. The spout can be adjusted to various position between fully closed to fully opened to control flow (Paragraph 37, Spout).
Regrading Claim 24, Daniels in view of Jackson fails to teach that at least the portion of the foam flowing along the top surface of the spout is configured to pass downward through the plurality of slots.
Melzer teaches a beverage dispenser with a spout (Abstract, Beverage Dispenser with a Spout) wherein at least the portion of the foam flowing along the top surface of the spout is configured to pass downward through the plurality of slots. (Figure 1 and 6 and Paragraph 30, Liquid passes through Apertures 34 in Filter 10 of the Spout and into interior cavity 18).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Daniels in view of Jackson to incorporate a spout that has a plurality of slots as stated in Melzer. The spout has apertures that helps filter out food particles (Paragraph 30, Filter).
Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daniels (EP Patent No. 1475024) in view of Jackson (US Patent No. 20100282829) and further in view of Melzer (US Patent No. 20130233890) and Fedewa (US patent No. 20160000244).
Regrading Claim 6, Daniels in view of Jackson and Melzer fails to teach that the spout has a flat top surface structure.
Fedewa teaches a foam holding container (Abstract, foam container) where the top surface of the spout is flat (Figure 3 and 5, Spout 60 has a flat surface).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Daniels in view of Jackson and Melzer to incorporate a spout with a flat surface as stated in Fedewa. The spout structure allows for liquid to pour effectively out from the container (Paragraph 29, Spout).
Regrading Claim 7, Daniels in view of Jackson and Melzer fails to teach that the spout has a side walls.
Fedewa teaches a foam holding container (Abstract, foam container) where the spout comprises side walls, each of the side walls extending above the flat top surface. (Figure 3 and 5, Spout 60 side walls that extends above the flat surface of the spout).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Daniels in view of Jackson and Melzer to incorporate a spout with side walls as stated in Fedewa. The spout structure allows for liquid to pour effectively out from the container (Paragraph 29, Spout).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daniels (EP Patent No. 1475024) in view of Jackson (US Patent No. 20100282829) and further in view of Melzer (US Patent No. 20130233890) and Schleinzer (US Patent No. 20110057062).
Regrading Claim 11, Daniels in view of Jackson fails to teach a spout that has a plurality of slots to dispense the liquid.
Melzer teaches a beverage dispenser with a spout (Abstract, Beverage Dispenser with a Spout) wherein the spout comprises a plurality of slots (Figure 1, Filter 10 has apertures 34, acting as slots).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Daniels in view of Jackson to incorporate a spout that has a plurality of slots as stated in Melzer. The spout has apertures that helps filter out food particles (Paragraph 30, Filter).
Daniels in view of Jackson and Melzer fails to teach a catch basin in the apparatus under neath the slots.
Schleinzer teaches a blending apparatus (Abstract, Blending Apparatus) with a catch basin (Figure1, Removable Drip Tray 13).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Daniels in view of Jackson and Melzer to incorporate a catch basin as stated in Schleinzer. The drip tray helps avoid any beverage residue from creating a mess that needs to be cleaned up (Paragraph 26, Drip Tray).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 4-6, filed December 22nd, 2025, with respect to the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Claim 1 was amended to include more structural limitation of the invention. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejection is made in view of Jackson and Melzer.
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 HAMZEH HICHAM AMIN whose telephone number is (571)272-4235. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:00 am - 4:00 pm.
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.
/HAMZEH HICHAM AMIN/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/IBRAHIME A ABRAHAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761