DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tansey in view of Wicks et al. and Guerrero et al.
Tansey discloses a beverage blending device comprising: a receptacle 810 configured to receive a beverage flavoring capsule 880, the receptacle defining a channel 804 configured to route flavoring fluid from the beverage flavoring capsule toward a container 806; a cover 816 configured to transition between a first position that covers the receptacle and a second position that exposes the receptacle; a fluid circuit 909 having an inlet that is disposed proximate to the channel (fig. 27C) and configured to route water from a source 802 toward the container; a controller 550 programmed to blend and dispense the flavoring fluid and the water; and a piston arrangement 837 working in combination with rollers 850 to compress the beverage flavoring capsule.
Wicks discloses that it is known in the art to provide a controllable heating element 113 within a capsule receiving receptacle, in order to heat the fluid contents of the capsule before dispensing.
Guerrero discloses that it is known in the art to provide a controllable heating element 61 in a fluid circuit of a beverage blending and dispensing apparatus, in order to heat water before mixing with a flavoring.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to provide the receptacle of Tansey with the heating element disclosed in Wicks, in order to apply heat to the contents of the capsule which would impact the final mixed product temperature and also improve the pliability of the capsule product for flow out of the receptacle.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to provide the fluid circuit of Tansey with the heating element disclosed in Guerrero, in order to heat the water as it leaves the water source as opposed to having to heat the water in the water source before placement at the apparatus.
In regards to the operation of the controller to operate the first and second heating elements in accordance to first and second parameters, it is apparent that the controller of Tansey is a programmable element which could be programmed for a multitude of functions.
In regards to the use of a threshold temperature as a parameter for operation of the heating elements, it is old and well known in the art to heat a product to a maximum or minimum temperature and then shut off the heating element for the production of a desired beverage taste.
In regards to the use of a predetermined period of time as a parameter for operation of the heating elements, it is old and well known in the art to use a minimum or maximum heating element operational time so as to avoid damage to the heating elements.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 15 September 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the prior art fails to disclose heating the capsule and water to the desired first and second parameters.
It should first be noted that the prior art references in combination disclose all of the claimed structural limitations including a controller element which is responsible for the operation of each of the claimed elements. Applicant’s claim of a programmable controller and the operational steps as a result of such programming are not seen as structurally or functionally limiting. It is known in the art that a controller is a programmable element which has the ability to be programmed in accordance to users wishes. It is the opinion of the examiner that the controller of Tansey could be programmed to perform the recited operational steps. Wicks discloses that the electric heater 113 is designed to preheat the capsule during a beverage preparation sequence. The preheated temperature could represent the claimed first parameter. Guerrero discloses that the heater 61 is designed to heat fluid to a set temperature range which could represent the claimed second parameter.
Applicant argues that the rack 837 of Tansey is not synonymous with a piston which is recited in the claims as an element for compressing the flavoring capsule.
The rejection of claims stated that the element 837 and the rollers 850 are what performed the function of compressing the capsule. It is this combination of elements that function as a piston arrangement.
Applicant argues that no art has been cited to establish that it is known in the art to heat a product to a specific temperature for a predetermined time period and subsequently stop heating the product (shut the heating element off).
The operation of a heating element in any beverage preparation apparatus is to operate the heater for a time frame which heats a product to a set or predetermined temperature, after establishing such temperature the heater is shut off. The recited sequence of steps are standard when preparing a beverage to minimize damage to the device.
In regards to applicant’s argument regarding amended claim 20, it should be noted that the heating element 113 of Wicks appears to surround the entire front portion of the capsule.
Applicant states that the limitation in claim 9 of activating the piston to compress the beverage flavoring capsule subsequent to heating the beverage flavoring capsule and the water was not previously addressed.
In Tansey it is apparent that the capsule is compressed by the piston arrangement in order to initiate the preparation process. In Wicks it is clear that the contents of the capsule are preheated by the heating element 113 before being forced from the capsule since the preheated temperature is part of the preparation process. Since the term “subsequent” is defined as occurring or coming later or after, it is clear that the activation of the piston would have to happen after a preheated temperature is achieved, since such temperature is part of the preparation process.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to REGINALD L. ALEXANDER whose telephone number is (571)272-1395. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 5:30-2:00.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ibrahime Abraham can be reached at 571-270-5569. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/REGINALD ALEXANDER/
Examiner
Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights