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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the cap body" in lines 5-6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
In claim 3, the term “generally” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “generally” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is not clear whether the opening is always rectangular or sometimes or a few times because of the term “generally”.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the cap body" in line 2 and “the inlet” and “outlet” in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
In claim 5, the term “generally” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “generally” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is not clear whether the cross-sectional shape of the sidewall is always triangular or sometimes or a few times because of the term “generally”.
In claim 6, the term “substantially” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is not clear whether the first and the second inner surfaces are completely planar or partially planar because of the term “substantially”.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the inlet" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 2 and 7 are also rejected under the same grounds for being dependent on claim 1.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the container" in line 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 recites “at least one projection” in line 1. Claim 10 depends from claim 9 which recites “at least one spring-biased projection”. Therefore, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 11 recites “at least one projection” in lines 1-2. Claim 11 depends from claim 9 which recites “at least one spring-biased projection”. Therefore, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
In claim 12, the term “substantially” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is not clear whether the first and the second shoulders are completely perpendicular to the base or partially perpendicular because of the term “substantially”.
In claim 13, the term “substantially” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is not clear whether the cross-sectional shape of the sidewall is completely triangular or partially triangular because of the term “substantially”.
Claim 14 recites “first and second projections” in line 8. Claim 14 recites “first and second spring-biased projections”. Therefore, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 15 is also rejected under the same grounds for being dependent on claim 14.
In claim 16, the term “substantially” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is not clear whether the first and the second inner facing surfaces are completely perpendicular to the base or partially perpendicular because of the term “substantially”.
In claim 17, the term “substantially” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is not clear whether the shape of the cap is completely triangular or partially triangular because of the term “substantially”.
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.
Claims 1-3, 6-12, and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Vitantonio et al. (“Vita” hereinafter) (US PG PUB 2009/0140006).
Regarding claim 1, Vita discloses an ingredient container (item 12, figure 2), comprising:
a container body (item 16, figure 2) having an opening (item 22, figure 3) leading into a hollow interior; and
a cap (item 18, figure 2) covering the opening, the cap having
a base (item 24, figure 3) with an inlet port (item 54, figure 3) and an outlet port (item 52, figure 3) formed therein (paragraph [0083]),
a sidewall (item 26, figure 3) extending around the base and defining an outer perimeter of a cap body, the sidewall including first and second shoulders (item 32, figure 3) extending upward from the base on opposed sides of the inlet and outlet ports (catches 32 extend outward and upward from the outer surface of the sidewall, figure 3), the first shoulder having a first inner surface and the second shoulder having a second inner surface (catches 32 have recesses formed therein forming inner surfaces, figure 3), the first and second inner surfaces each having a detent (hollow opening of catch 32, figure 3, paragraph [0081]) therein configured to receive a corresponding protrusion (item 164, figures 4, 7, 8) in a carriage assembly (item 152, figure 4) of a beverage carbonation system (item 14, figure 1).
Regarding claim 2, Vita discloses that the detent comprises an opening formed through the first and second inner surfaces (figures 2-4)
Regarding claim 3, Vita discloses that the opening is generally rectangular (opening is rectangular shaped, see figures 2-4).
Regarding claim 6, Vita discloses that the first and second inner surfaces are substantially planar (figures 2-4)
Regarding claim 7, Vita discloses that the first shoulder has a first outer surface opposite the first inner surface, and the second shoulder has a second outer surface opposite the second inner surface, the first and second outer surfaces being convex (catch 32 are U-shaped and comprise curved outer surfaces away from the opening, figures 2-4)
Regarding claim 8, Vita discloses that the base includes a circular recess (item 36, figure 3) formed therein and having the inlet and outlet port position therein.
Regarding claims 9, 11, and 14, Vita discloses a carbonation system (item 10, figure 1), comprising:
a housing (item 14, figure 1) having at least one movable carriage (item 152, figure 4) with a cavity therein, the cavity including a first and a second spring-biased (item 172, figure 4, paragraph [0098]) projection (item 164, figure 4);
a container housing (item 12, figure 2) defining a hollow interior a base (item 24, figure 3) with inlet (item 54, figure 3) and outlet ports (item 52, figure 3) leading to the hollow interior, and
a sidewall (item 26, figure 3) extending around the base and having first and second shoulders (item 32, figure 3), and
a first and a second detent (hollow opening of catch 32, figure 3, paragraph [0081]) formed on an inner facing surface of at least one of the first and second shoulders, the at least one detent being configured to receive the at least one spring-biased projection (item 164, figures 4, 7, 8) in the carriage when the container is disposed within the cavity in the carriage (figures 7-9, paragraphs [0100], [0111]).
Regarding claim 10, Vita discloses that the installing operation of the container in the carbonation system would inherently produce a click or snap sound due to the spring-loaded nature of the projection 164 interacting with the catch 32 of the container housing (paragraph [0111]).
Regarding claim 12, Vita discloses that the inner facing surface of the first and second shoulders extends perpendicular to the base (figures 2-4).
Regarding claim 15, Vita discloses that the container housing comprises a container body (item 16, figure 2) coupled to a cap (item 18, figure 2), the cap including a base (item 24, figure 3) having the inlet and outlet ports therein, and wherein a sidewall extends around the base and includes first and second shoulders, the first and second detents being formed in the first and second shoulders, respectively (see rejection of claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 16, Vita discloses that the first and second shoulders have first and second inner facing surfaces (catches 32 have recesses formed therein forming inner surfaces, figure 3) with the first and second detents formed therein (figures 2-4), and wherein the first and second inner facing surfaces extend perpendicular to the base (figures 2-4).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 5, 13, and 17 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VISHAL J PANCHOLI whose telephone number is (571)272-9324. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday (9 am - 7 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, Paul Durand can be reached at 571-272-4459. 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.
/Vishal Pancholi/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754