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.
Claims 17-19 and 21-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Piscaer et al. (US 20090107342 A1).
Regarding claim 17, Piscaer discloses
A beverage preparation machine having apparatus (apparatus 100, fig.1) for generating foam in a beverage ingredient [Par.0028 cited: “… at least one beverage such as coffee, tea, chocolate milk, soup and the like. Here, as desired, the beverage may be foamed…”], the foam generating apparatus (apparatus 100, fig.1) including at least one nozzle (device, fig.2b) having a fluid flow passage (outlet 130A, 130B, fig.2b) which defines a fluid flow path from an inlet end of said passage (outlet 130A, 130B) towards an outlet end of said passage (outlet 130A, 130B), the nozzle (device, fig.2b) having a restrictor (plug 136A, 136B, fig.2b) movable relative to the passage (outlet 130A, 130B) to vary the minimum cross-sectional area of the fluid flow path through the passage (outlet 130A, 130B), the nozzle (device, fig.2b) having an actuator arrangement (first and second drive 150A, 150 B, fig.2b) for moving the restrictor (plug 136A, 136B) wherein the passage (outlet 130A, 130B, fig.2b) has a longitudinal axis and the restrictor (plug 136A, 136B, fig.2b) is co-axial with or parallel to the passage (outlet 130A, 130B), the cross-sectional area of the restrictor (plug 136A, 136B) being smaller than that of the passage (outlet 130A, 130B) [parts of plug 136A, 136B, are smaller than outlet 130A, 130B, fig.2b].
PNG
media_image1.png
516
485
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 18, Piscaer discloses
the foam generating apparatus (apparatus 100, fig.1) has more than one said nozzle (device, figs.2b and 3).
Regarding claim 19, Piscaer discloses
the foam generating apparatus (apparatus 100, fig.1) comprises at least two of said nozzles (device, figs.2b and 3) connected in series or in parallel.
Regarding claim 21, Piscaer discloses
the foam generating apparatus (apparatus 100, fig.1) comprises an actuator (bottom part of first and second drive 150A, 150 B, fig.2b) operatively connected with the restrictor (plug 136A, 136B, fig.2b) of at least two of said nozzles (device, figs.2b and 3) for simultaneously moving the restrictors (plug 136A, 136B) of said at least two nozzles (device, figs.2b and 3) relative to their respective passages (outlet 130A, 130B, fig.2b).
Regarding claim 22, Piscaer discloses
the foam generating apparatus (apparatus 100, fig.1) including, at least two of said nozzles (device, figs.2b and 3) and wherein the bores of said at least two nozzles (device, figs.2b and 3) are defined in a single, common body.
Regarding claim 23, Piscaer discloses
the restrictor (plug 136A, 136B, fig.2b) is movable to at least one retracted position in which it is fully withdrawn out of the passage (outlet 130A, 130B, fig.2b).
Regarding claim 24, Piscaer discloses
the restrictor (plug 136A, 136B, fig.2b) is movable to at least one advanced position in which the restrictor (plug 136A, 136B) projects into the passage (outlet 130A, 130B, fig.2b).
Regarding claim 25, Piscaer discloses
the restrictor (plug 136A, 136B, fig.2b) is movable to any one of a range of different advanced positions.
Regarding claim 26, Piscaer discloses
when the restrictor (plug 136A, 136B, fig.2b) projects into the passage (outlet 130A, 130B, fig.2b), at least part of the fluid flow path through the passage (outlet 130A, 130B) is defined by a gap between the restrictor (plug 136A, 136B) and a surface of the passage (outlet 130A, 130B) [gap between plug 136A, 136B and outlet 130A, 130B, fig.2b].
Regarding claim 27, Piscaer discloses
the restrictor (plug 136A, 136B, fig.2b) and the passage (outlet 130A, 130B, fig.2b) are the same shape in lateral cross-section.
Regarding claim 28, Piscaer discloses
the restrictor (plug 136A, 136B, fig.2b) is an elongate pin-like member aligned parallel or co-axially with an axis of the passage (outlet 130A, 130B, fig.2b) and is reciprocally movable in a direction parallel to said axis.
Regarding claim 29, Piscaer discloses
the actuator arrangement (first and second drive 150A, 150 B, fig.2b) comprises a stepper motor [Par.0051 cited: “…central shaft 9 is driven by drive means 12, for instance an electric motor…”].
Regarding claim 30, Piscaer discloses
the nozzle (apparatus 100, fig.1) comprising a body (housing of apparatus 100, fig.1) defining a bore (compartment inside apparatus 100, fig.1) having an axis and wherein the passage (outlet 130A, 130B, fig.2b) is located in a region of the bore so as to extend parallel to or co-axial with said axis, the nozzle (apparatus 100) comprising an inlet port (inlet opening 104, fig.1) for directing fluid into the bore upstream of the passage (outlet 130A, 130B), the restrictor (plug 136A, 136B, fig.2b) being aligned parallel to or co-axially with the passage (outlet 130A, 130B), the actuator arrangement (first and second drive 150A, 150 B, fig.2b) being adapted to move the restrictor (plug 136A, 136B) reciprocally along the bore to move the restrictor (plug 136A, 136B) into and out of the passage (outlet 130A, 130B).
Regarding claim 31, Piscaer discloses
passage (outlet 130A, 130B, fig.2b) is defined by an annular sleeve (constriction 134A, 134B, fig.2b) mounted in said region of the bore (compartment inside apparatus 100, fig.1).
Regarding claim 32, Piscaer discloses
the restrictor (plug 136A, 136B, fig.2b) is an elongate pin-like member (part 146a, 146b, fig.2b), the nozzle (device, fig.2b) being configured such at that the pin-like member (part 146a, 146b) is locatable in at least one advanced position in which part (bottom of part 146a, 146b) of the pin-like member (part 146a, 146b) penetrates the passage (outlet 130A, 130B, fig.2b) while another part (top of part 146a, 146b) of the pin-like member (part 146a, 146b) is located in the bore opposite the inlet port (inlet opening 104, fig.1) such that fluid entering bore through the port is directed onto the pin-like member (part 146a, 146b) and is able to enter the passage (outlet 130A, 130B) by flowing about the pin-like member (part 146a, 146b).
Regarding claim 33, Piscaer discloses
the pin-like member (part 146a, 146b, fig.2b) is locatable in at least one retracted position in which the pin-like member (part 146a, 146b) is fully withdrawn from the passage (outlet 130A, 130B, fig.2b) so as to be wholly located on the opposite side of the inlet port (inlet opening 104, fig.1) from the sleeve (constriction 134A, 134B, fig.2b).
Regarding claim 34, Piscaer discloses
the actuator arrangement (first and second drive 150A, 150B, fig.2b) comprises an actuator member (top portion of first and second drive 150A, 150B, fig.2b) reciprocally slidable in a further region of the bore which extends beyond the inlet port (inlet opening 104, fig.1) on the opposite side of the inlet port (inlet opening 104) from the sleeve (constriction 134A, 134B, fig.2b).
Regarding claim 35, Piscaer discloses
the passage (outlet 130A, 130B, fig.2b) is cylindrical and at least part (part 146a, 146b, fig.2b) of the restrictor (plug 136A, 136B, fig.2b) which projects into the passage (outlet 130A, 130B) is cylindrical but with a smaller outer dimeter than the passage (outlet 130A, 130B).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Piscaer et al. (US 20090107342 A1).
Regarding claim 20, Piscaer discloses substantially all the features as set forth in claim 19 above, but does not explicitly disclose the foam generating apparatus comprises four of said nozzles, a first pair of said nozzles being fluidly connectable in series and a second pair of said nozzles being fluidly connectable in series.
However, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify a foam generating apparatus of Piscaer, comprises four of said nozzles, a first pair of said nozzles being fluidly connectable in series and a second pair of said nozzles being fluidly connectable in series, as it well known in the art of duplication in part of manufacturing design choice purpose, in order to improve productivity.
Response to Argument
Applicant's arguments filed on 01/21/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive as the following reasons:
The applicants argued: “…The claimed beverage preparation machine is not disclosed is Piscaer. More specifically, Piscaer does not disclose a beverage preparation machine having the claimed "passage has a longitudinal axis and the restrictor is co-axial with or parallel to the passage, the cross-sectional area of the restrictor being smaller than that of the passage." (Emphasis added.) The Office action, p. 3, alleges that plug 136A/B corresponds to the claimed restrictor. However, the plugs 136A/B of Piscaer have cross-sectional areas larger than that of the outlet 130A/B. As described in Piscaer, paras. 38 and 39, the plugs 136A/B function "for closing off the fluid communication 133 to the outlet 10a, 103b, respectively." Thus, for at least this reason, Piscaer does not anticipate independent claim 17 (nor those claims dependent therefrom).…”, Remark Page 6.
The examiner’s response: the applicant’s argument is not persuasive because the task of 102 rejections is “a claim is anticipated only if each and every element as set forth in the claim is found, either expressly or inherently described, in a single prior art reference”. Verdagaal Bros. v. Union Oil Co. of California, 814 F.2d 628,631,2 USPQ2d 1051, 1053 (Fed. Cir. 1987). In this case, the Piscaer reference discloses all the limitation as cited in the independent claim 17, such as an apparatus (apparatus 100, fig.1); at least one nozzle (device, fig.2b); a restrictor (plug 136A, 136B, fig.2b); a fluid flow passage (outlet 130A, 130B, fig.2b); an actuator arrangement (first and second drive 150A, 150 B, fig.2b); and
the passage (outlet 130A, 130B, fig.2b) has a longitudinal axis and the restrictor (plug 136A, 136B, fig.2b) is co-axial with or parallel to the passage (outlet 130A, 130B), the cross-sectional area of the restrictor (plug 136A, 136B) being smaller than that of the passage (outlet 130A, 130B) [parts of plug 136A, 136B, are smaller than outlet 130A, 130B, fig.2b]. See annotated figure below.
For the purpose of examination, a dosing unit 132A/132B in fig.2b of the Piscaer reference, is considered as part(s) of plug 136A, 136B (which is considered as a restrictor). As shown in fig.2b of the Piscaer reference, the dosing unit 132A/132B has a cross sectional area being smaller than the outlet 130A/130B. See annotated figure below.
PNG
media_image2.png
599
769
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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 extension fee 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 PHUONG T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1834. The examiner can normally be reached 9.00am-5.00pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Steven Crabb can be reached on 571-270-5095. 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.
/PHUONG T NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
02/01/2026