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
The election of group I, claims 1-5 and 7-16 without traverse in the reply mailed 3/20/2026 is acknowledged.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 14, 15, and 16, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grebius (U.S. Publication 2016/0038209) in view of Herold (U.S. Patent 5249862A).
Regarding claim 1, Grebius teaches a capsule for mixing multiple substances (figures 17, 18, 21, 24), comprising: a main chamber (internal volume of item 3) having a main chamber bottom (portion of item 3’ proximate item 33’) and a main chamber top (item 3’ proximate item 2’), the main chamber top having a top opening (opening proximate connection end portion item 2’ described in paragraph 47 and shown in figure 17); a main piston fitted in the main chamber (piston item 6’ described in paragraph 52 and shown in figure 24); a torque adapter (item 5’ and item 4’ are considered reading on a torque adapter) for transferring a torque from an external actuator (knob 5’ is considered the external actuator) to a mixer element (item 16’) via the main chamber bottom (items 4’ and 5’ are proximate the right most side of chamber item 3 proximate item 33’); and a cup shaped reservoir (figure 17 receptacle item 20) having a reservoir bottom which is having a bottom opening (figure 21 item 24), wherein the reservoir bottom is fixated to the main chamber top such that the bottom opening is aligned with the top opening of the main chamber (item 21 is aligned with the opening proximate item 2’), so that fluid pushed by the main piston from the main chamber is passed through the top opening and the bottom opening and is accumulated in the cup shaped reservoir (item 21 is fluid communication with item 3’, item 3 houses item 6’), and one repository chamber mechanically coupled to the main chamber (figure 9, receptacle item 1 is considered reading on a repository and coupled to item 3), having a repository tubular chamber bottom opening (opening in item 1 that allows for material to flow into item 3), with a passage fluidly connecting the repository chamber to a main chamber (see arrows showing flow of liquid from item 1 to item 3, the flow path extending through item 10). Regarding claim 1, Grebius is silent to at least two repository tubular chambers adapted to contain substance mechanically connected to the main chamber and a repository tubular chamber opening, the at least two passages each fluidly connecting one of the at least two repository tubular chambers to the main chamber. Regarding claim 1, Herold teaches at least two repository tubular chambers adapted to contain substance (figure 2 items 12 and 13 cartridges are considered reading on repository tubular chambers) mechanically connected to the main chamber (both items 12 and 13 are mechanically connected to item 14 via item 53, see column 4 lines 4 lines 4-8, the abstract describes the direct connection between the mixer to the cartridges) and a repository tubular chamber bottom opening (outlet openings in cartridges described in column 4 lines 8-10), and the at least two passages each fluidly connecting one of the at least two repository tubular chambers to the main chamber (each of the cartridges items 12 and 13 flow material from their outlet into item 14). Regarding claim 1, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the one repository tubular chamber of Grebius with the two repository tubular chambers of Herold in order to mix the desired amount of ingredients.
Regarding claim 2, Grebius teaches an outer shell of the main chamber (item 3’ outer wall is considered reading on the outer shell) and the cup shaped reservoir (21) as two separate pieces. Regarding claim 2, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the one repository tubular chamber of Grebius with the two repository tubular chambers of Herold in order to mix the desired amount of ingredients. Regarding claim 2, absent any unexpected results, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to make the chamber and the cup integral in order to allow for an easier mixing operation by a user since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S. 164 (1893).
Regarding claim 3, Grebius teaches a mixer rod (item 4’) having the mixer element disposed at a distal end (item 16 is at one end of item 4 considered the distal end) and the torque adapter disposed at a proximal end (item 5’ is at a proximal end of item 4’), the mixer rod is fitted to pass along the main piston such that the mixer element is mounted in the main chamber between the main chamber top and a distal end of the main piston (see figure 24 items 6’ which is has item 4’ pass through to item 16’).
Regarding claim 5, Grebius teaches wherein the main piston is displaceable between the main chamber bottom and the main chamber top along the axis of the mixer element (item 6’ moves along the axis of items 4’ and 16’).
Grebius is silent to the language of claim 8. Regarding claim 8, Herold teaches wherein the at least two repository tubular chambers are peripheral to the main chamber (items 12 and 13 are peripheral to item 14). Regarding claim 8, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the one repository tubular chamber of Grebius with the two repository tubular chambers of Herold in order to mix the desired amount of ingredients.
Regarding claim 13, Grebius teaches wherein the bottom opening includes a single opening (there is one opening proximate item 2’).
Regarding claim 14, Grebius teaches a single bottom opening (opening proximate item 2’). Regarding claim 14, Grebius is silent to multiple bottom openings. Regarding claim 14, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the one repository tubular chamber of Grebius with the two repository tubular chambers of Herold in order to mix the desired amount of ingredients. Regarding claim 14, absent any unexpected results, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to duplicate the number of openings in order to dispense mixed material to multiple containers simultaneously since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Regarding claim 15, Grebius teaches wherein the reservoir bottom is detachably fixated to the main chamber top (item 21’ is detachable from item 3’ as shown in figures 18 and 20 configurations).
Regarding claim 16, Grebius teaches wherein the reservoir bottom is detachably fixated to the main chamber top (item 21’ is detachable from item 3’ as shown in figures 18 and 20 configurations). Regarding claim 16, Grebius is silent to the permanently fixated configuration. Regarding claim 16, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the one repository tubular chamber of Grebius with the two repository tubular chambers of Herold in order to mix the desired amount of ingredients. Regarding claim 16, absent any unexpected results, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the reservoir bottom and the main chamber top permanently fixed in order to allow for an easier mixing operation by a user since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S. 164 (1893).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 7, 9, 10, 11, and 12 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 4, the prior art does not teach or fairly suggest a capsule with the combination of the main chamber, piston, torque adapter, cup shaped reservoir, at least two repository tubular chambers, the mixing rod in between the mixer element and main piston, and the main chamber top opening sealed and opened by a sharp tip at a distal end of the mixer rod.
Regarding claim 7, the prior art does not teach or fairly suggest a capsule with the combination of the main chamber, piston, torque adapter, cup shaped reservoir, at least two repository tubular chambers, wherein the main piston is seals and opens the two passages when being moved along the main chamber.
Regarding claim 9, the prior art does not teach or fairly suggest a capsule with the combination of the main chamber, piston, torque adapter, cup shaped reservoir, at least two repository tubular chambers, wherein each of the at least two repository tubular outer openings is sealed by a repository tubular piston.
Regarding claim 12, the prior art does not teach or fairly suggest a capsule with the combination of the main chamber, piston, torque adapter, cup shaped reservoir, at least two repository tubular chambers, wherein the external actuator pulls the mixer rod downward so the mixer element is pushing the main piston to open the at least two passages.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANSHU BHATIA whose telephone number is (571)270-7628. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 11 a.m. to 7:30 p.m..
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, Claire Wang can be reached at (571)270-1051. 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.
/ANSHU BHATIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774
Prosecution Insights