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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1, 2 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Oh (KR20170121492).
There is disclosed in Oh device for making iced beverages, the device comprising: a cup 10 with a first circumference, the cup comprising an inner wall 11 and an upper rim 12; a displacement head 24 that inserts into the cup, the displacement head comprising a lip 22 and an outer wall with a second circumference, where the difference between the first circumference and the second circumference is a constant circumferential gap that provides a region to form a frozen shell f a beverage along the inner wall of the cup; and a cap 30 with a raised lip that is fitted over the upper rim of the cup, the cap comprising an aperture 33 for insertion of a straw.
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) 3 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oh in view of Kim (KR 20170095076).
Kim discloses, in an iced beverage making device, that it is known in the art to construct a displacement head 5 and cup 1 of silicone (synthetic resin).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to modify the device of Oh with the teachings of Kim, and construct the elements of a silicone (synthetic resin) to enhance the durability of the device for withstanding cold temperatures.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oh.
Oh, as discussed in a rejection above, discloses all of the claimed subject matter except the claimed size range.
It should be noted that recited sizes of claim 5 are common sizes for single cup servings of beverages.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to construct the cup of Oh within the claimed size range, since it has been held that where general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oh in view of Cai.
Cai discloses that it is known in the art to provide a drinking slot 22 in the raised lip of a cap which is fitted over an upper rim of a cup for a single server beverage device.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to provide the cap of Oh with the drinking slot taught by Cai, in order to allow a user to drink beverage from the cup in a multitude of ways.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-20 are allowed.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art references to Goubart, Beloff, Huxel et al., Gerlinger et al. and Selbak are cited for their disclosure of the state of the art.
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