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 .
This office action is in response to amendment filed on 7/2/26. Claims 1,7,13-15 are amended and claim 8 is cancelled. Claims 1-7,9-15 are pending.
The previous objection to the abstract and 112 second paragraph rejection are withdrawn due to the amendment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-7,9-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peterson ( 2016/0230133) in view of Schuh ( 2016/0073673).
For claim 1, Peterson discloses a single beverage cartridge. The cartridge comprises separate chambers. One chamber comprises a beverage concentrate and another chamber comprises distilled alcohol solution. The beverage concentrate comprises high solid content of 30% or more and an alcohol content of 20% or less, including less 5%. The dissolved solids in the beverage concentrate includes proteins, sugars. The distilled alcohol solution comprises an ethanol concentration of at least 70%. The aroma component extracted from the distilled alcohol solution can be added to the beverage concentrate or kept in the alcohol solution to alter the flavor or aroma of a beverage made from the cartridge. The complex aromatic character of hops aroma can be preserved by maintaining the hops aroma compounds in the distilled alcohol solution. Peterson discloses a relatively small amount of concentrate may be used to make a significantly larger volume of beverage, e.g 50 ml of concentrate by be used to form a 350 ml beverage. The cartridge may take any suitable form such as pod, capsule etc.. ( see paragraphs 0003,0008-0012,0025-0033,0038-0040)
For claim 14, Peterson discloses a method of preparing a single serve capsule comprising the steps of preparing a beverage concentrate, preparing a distilled alcohol solution, providing a capsule comprising at least two compartments, introducing the beverage concentrate into one compartment and introducing the distilled alcohol solution into another compartment and closing the capsule with a lid. ( see paragraphs 0038,0039)
For claim 15, Peterson discloses a method of preparing a hoped alcoholic beverage comprising the steps of loading the cartridge into a cartridge holder of a beverage machine, delivering liquid to the machine to cause carbon dioxide to be generated, releasing the beverage concentrate from one compartment , releasing the distilled alcohol solution from another compartment, mixing the carbonated liquid and the beverage medium provided by the two compartments and dispensing the beverage. It’s obvious that foam head will form as the result of the carbonation. ( see paragraphs 0046-0051)
Peterson does not disclose the amount of beverage concentrate, protein, hop acid mvolume of ethanol, type of protein and water as in claim 1, the adding of coloring agent as in claims 2-3, the pH as in claim 5, the ingredients as in claims 6-12, the volume as in claim 13, the amount of protein and hop acid, type of protein as in claim 14.
Schuh discloses a beverage precursor for preparing alcoholic beverages such as gin, beer, wine etc.. Schuh teaches to add different flavoring groups to obtain specific flavor and aroma. For instance, ethyl acetate, ethyl hexanoate is added to obtain fruity aroma. Organic acids such as succinic acid, lactic acid etc.. are added form sour taste. Sweeteners such as glucose, fructose, are added to obtain sweet taste. Hop extract, iso extract, humulone etc.. are added for bitter taste. Ingredients such as carrageenan, whey protein, pectin, xanthan gum, gellan gum etc.. are added for umami taste and mouthfeel. Schuh discloses that colorant can be added to the beverage precursor such that the beverage formed from the beverage precursor has the color of a desired beverage. ( see paragraph 0005-0014, 0058, tables 4A, 4B, 8A, 8B, 9A, 9B,12A,12B,13A,13B.
Peterson discloses the hop components can be maintained in the distilled alcohol solution. Thus, it’s obviously inherent that the alcohol solution contains the hop acids as claimed. In any event, it’s known in the art as shown in Schuh that hop acids such as iso extract is used to add bitter taste to an alcohol beverage. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to add hop acids when desiring to have a bitter taste. The amount added would have been an obvious matter of choice depending on the degree of bitterness. Peterson discloses the beverage concentrate contains protein. It's also known in the art as shown in Schul to add protein for a umami taste and mouthfeel. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the to determine the proper amount of protein through routine experimentation to obtain the most optimum mouthfeel and taste. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to determine the volume of the capsule, the ethanol and water content depending on the volume of beverage and the alcohol content of the beverage to be made. Such parameter can readily be determined by one of ordinary skill in the art through routine experimentation.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to add a coloring agent to the beverage concentrate as taught in Schuh to obtain a desire appearance in the final beverage. The particular color selected would have been an obvious matter of choice depending on the color desired. For instance, it would have been obvious to select carotene if an orange hue is desired or malt extract if a brownish hue is wanted. It would have been obvious to add organic acids as taught in Schuh when a sour taste is wanted. It would have been within the skill of one in the art to determine the amount depending on the extent of sourness desired. The pH of the solution would depend on the amount which in turn depends on the degree of sourness desired. Peterson discloses the beverage concentrate contains protein. It's also known in the art as shown in Schul to add protein and gums for an umami taste and mouthfeel. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the to determine the proper amount of protein and gum through routine experimentation to obtain the most optimum mouthfeel and taste. Gums such as xanthan gum, cellulose are also a source of soluble fiber. Thus, the addition of such components will provide soluble fiber. The addition of protein and the protein present in the beverage concentrate will function as foaming because the same ingredient is present. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to add glucose, fructose etc.. as taught in Schuh when desiring to obtain a sweet taste. The amount added depends on the degrees of sweetness desired. Such parameter can readily be determined by one of ordinary skill in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to determine the volume of the capsule depending on the volume of beverage to be made and the concentration desired. Such parameter can readily be determined by one of ordinary skill in the art through routine experimentation.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peterson in view of Schuh as applied to claims 1-3, 5-15 above, and further in view of Fujino.
Peterson and Schuh do not disclose color units in EBC.
Fujino discloses a process for producing fermented malt drink such as beer. The color of the drink is measured in EBC unit which indicates the light or darkness of the drink. ( see paragraphs 0008,0014)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to determine the color when the alcohol beverage is beer as taught in Fujino so as to obtain a proper color for the beverage. The number will depend on the lightness or darkness desired. Such parameter would have been an obvious matter of choice.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/2/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In the response, applicant argues hops do not contain significant amounts of hop acids; therefore hop extraction with the distilled alcohol solution will not yield iso-alpha acid which are formed by thermal isomerization during wort oiling and are non-volatile. This argument is not persuasive. The claims are not directed to a method of forming alcoholic beverage. There is no requirement that the hop acids is formed from the wort oiling. The hop acids are just required to be present in the alcoholic liquid containing ethanol. Thus, the hop acids can just be added to the alcoholic liquid. Peterson discloses in paragraph 001 that the distilled alcohol solution may be used to extract components from hops such as hop oils and aromatics. This indicates that hop acids are present. Peterson also discloses that the extracted components may be kept in the alcohol solution. Thus, the hop acids that are extracted can be kept in the alcohol solution. Applicant states that hops do not contain significant amounts of hop acids. It’s unclear what would be considered as significant amounts. Furthermore, Peterson discloses in paragraph 0004 that the alcoholic beverage used includes beer, cider, malt etc.. and may be made using a high gravity brewing process. Thus, if hop acids are formed during the production of the alcoholic beverage, then it’s obvious the hop acids are present. Furthermore, Schul discloses hop acids can be added to affect the bitterness of an alcoholic beverage. Thus, it would have been obvious to add hop acids if they are not present when desiring the bitter taste in the beverage. The amount can vary depending on the taste desired. Applicant argues that Schul provides no reason why a person of ordinary skill in the art would have modified Peterson’s cartridge by removing hop acids from the beer concentrate and instead incorporating them in the ethanol-rich component. The examiner respectfully disagrees. Schul provides teaching of adding certain components to obtain a specific taste. Peterson does not require removal of hop acids from the ethanol-rich component. Peterson discloses the extracted components from hop can be kept in the alcohol solution. There is ample teaching from the prior art to have hop acids in the alcohol solution to obtain specific taste and flavor. Applicant further argues that applying Schuh teaching to Peterson would have introduced hop acids into the alcoholic beer used to prepare the beer concentrate, resulting in an aqueous liquid containing well above 10mg/l of hop acids. This argument is not persuasive. The Schuh reference is only relied upon for teaching of adding certain components to affect taste of alcoholic beverage. There is no conclusion reached from the Schuh disclosure that the beverage precursor is alcoholic beer. Peterson teaches separating the alcohol from an alcohol beverage to produce a concentrate and alcohol solution. Peterson discloses aroma compounds can be added to the concentrate. The amount added would have been an obvious matter of selection depending on the taste and flavor desired. If the alcohol solution already contains components giving a bitter taste, it would have been readily obvious to one skilled in the art to omit such components from the concentrate or to use small amount. This parameter is a matter of routine experimentation that is well within the skill of one in the art. Generally different in concentration does not establish patentability is absence of showing of unexpected result or criticality "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
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 LIEN THUY TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1408. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday.
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, Emily Le can be reached at 571-272-0903. 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.
September 10, 2026
/LIEN T TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1793
Prosecution Insights