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
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group 1 of claims 1-8, nozzle species (a) movable and flow meter species (a) inline in the reply filed on 27 March 2026 is acknowledged.
Response to Arguments
The examiner agrees that removing the funnel of Lowe would change the principle of operation of Lowe. No such modification was or is proposed. The Applicant argues that a combination with Lowe’s funnel cannot meet the limitation “the fluid flows through the beverage precursor and through the pour-over bag into the cup.” This is not persuasive. There is no requirement that it flow directly into the cup, so that flow via the intermediate funnel is certainly within the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim. It may even be reasonable to interpret the funnel itself as a cup.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-8 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Any rejections or objections, including the Double Patenting rejection, not repeated herein are withdrawn.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 1 recites “a holder for holding a pour-over bag.” The claim continues to recite various features of the pour-over bag. The claim does not positively recite the pour-over bag and so these limitations are considered only insofar as they affect the claimed structure of the holder and other claimed elements.
No claim limitations are interpreted under 112(f).
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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iue (WO 0057761 with reference to the translation placed in the file 24 February 2026) in view of Noh (KR 101229661).
[AltContent: textbox (cup reception bay)]
PNG
media_image1.png
617
555
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Iue (WO 0057761) discloses:
A beverage brewing system comprising: a case (1, see Fig 1) defining a cup reception bay (recess at let side of housing in Fig 1) for receiving a cup (C, ¶24) and a nozzle assembly (5, 6, 7) positioned above the cup reception bay;
a reservoir positioned within the case for containing a fluid (¶24 “a hot water tank is provided at the top of the interior and a hot water storage tank is provided at the bottom,” see 29 and 32 in Fig 17, ¶44); a pump (34, see Fig 17, ¶44) positioned within the case for moving the fluid from the reservoir to the nozzle assembly; a heating element positioned within the case (implied by “boiling tank,” ¶24, heater 26, heater 20, see Fig 17, ¶43) for heating the fluid; a holder (holder 3 in Fig 1) for holding a pour-over bag (filter 4, ¶24) beneath the nozzle assembly, the holder comprising a first arm and a second arm (Fig 1 shows a side view with a single arm. It is understood that there is a second arm on the opposite side. Other Figures show different supports, but the rejection is based on the embodiment of Fig 1.)…
the pour-over bag having an opening configured to receive a beverage precursor (¶93 “coffee powder is placed in a single-serving filter,” ¶6 describes a cloth filter which one would interpret as reusable and thus capable of being refilled), …with the opening (top of 4) oriented toward the nozzle assembly (see Fig 1), the nozzle assembly pours the fluid into the pour-over bag through the opening (¶37-¶38 “the bottom of the pouring spout (6) is at the center of the filter (4)), and the fluid flows through the beverage precursor and through the pour-over bag into the cup (¶3 “collected in a cup”) positioned beneath the pour-over bag within the cup reception bay.
Iue does not disclose:
each of the first arm and the second arm including a pin extending toward the nozzle assembly, and the pins being configured to be received in pin reception holes defined by the pour-over bag,
wherein the pour-over bag hangs from the holder on the pins
Iue is silent on the specific interface between the arms of 3 and the bag 4 in the embodiment of Fig 1.
PNG
media_image2.png
587
568
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Noh teaches:
for coffee (¶1), an open top hanging dripper 1 including a filter 2 that hangs from two arms, each arm having one or more locking projections 401, each locking projection having a vertical pin. “The coupling holes (111) of the packaging pack (10) are fitted into the locking projection (401) of the stand (40), and the packaging pack (10) is installed on the stand (40). The central part of the stand (40) is formed in a recess according to the shape of the packaging pack, so that the packaging pack (10) is installed on the stand while maintaining the opening (15) in an open state.” (¶70).
COMBINATION
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the brewing system of Iue to include one or more locking projections on each arm and modifying the filter bag to include corresponding holes to mate with the projections because Noh teaches that this is an appropriate way of holding a coffee filter.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iue (WO 0057761) in view of Noh (KR 101229661) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Harrod (WO 2015051407).
Regarding claim 2, the brewing system of Iue as modified by the locking projections of Noh does not teach:
a first level detector for detecting a level of the fluid within the pour-over bag.
Harrod teaches:
a drip coffee machine having a level sensor for the filter basket to control the pump (p.6 lines 3-28, “This signal causes the MCU to deactivate the heating system 103 and/or pump 102”) to regulate the level of fluid in the filter (abstract). The level sensor may be any of various kinds of level sensor, including capacitive, rotating paddle, magnetic, vibrating element, pneumatic, RF admittance, microwave, hydrostatic, air bubbler, ultrasonic, mechanical, switch, mechanical float, load cell (p.2 lines 20-33).
COMBINATION
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the brewing system of Iue as modified by the locking projections of Noh to have a level sensor to control the pump to obtain the benefit of regulating the level of fluid in the filter.
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iue (WO 0057761) in view of Noh (KR 101229661) and Harrod (WO 2015051407) as applied to claim 2, and further in view of Lowe (US 200/40221724).
Regarding claim 3, the brewing system of Iue as modified by the locking projections of Noh and the level sensor and pump control of Harrod does not teach:
the first level detector comprises at least one temperature detector.
Harrod teaches several different kinds of level sensor (p.2 lines 20-33), and is thus understood to be compatible with a variety of level sensors.
Lowe teaches a thermal sensor for sensing the level of fluid in a coffee filter. “The second sensor 151 is capable of sensing the level of fluid 157 in the funnel assembly 22. The second sensor 151 can be for example, an optical, acoustical, conductive, thermal or any other sensor suitable to detect a level of fluid 157” (¶60). The thermal level sensor 151 is adjacent to the top of the coffee filter (see Fig 3).
COMBINATION
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the brewing system of Iue with the level sensor and pump control of Harrod to have a thermal sensor, i.e. a temperature sensor, to detect the level of fluid in the coffee filter because Lowe teaches that a thermal, i.e., a temperature sensor is suitable for this purpose.
Regarding claim 4, the combination teaches:
the at least one temperature detector (Lowe 151, see Fig 3, ¶60) is positioned proximate a top of the pour-over bag and is configured to detect a temperature of the pour-over bag as the nozzle assembly pours the fluid into the pour-over bag, and wherein the at least one temperature detector is configured to turn off the pump (Harrod p.5 line 30-p.5 line 28 “This signal causes the MCU to deactivate the heating system 103 and/or pump 102”) when the temperature of the pour-over bag exceeds a first predetermined temperature (from the arrangement shown in Lowe, it is evident that an increase in temperature corresponds to an increase in the hot water level in the filter).
Claims 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iue (WO 0057761) in view of Noh (KR 101229661), Harrod (WO 2015051407) and Lowe (US 200/40221724) as applied to claim 4, and further in view of Alexander (US 20180360264).
Regarding claim 5, the combination teaches:
at least one temperature detector comprises a first temperature detector (Lowe: 151, ¶60).
The combination does not teach:
the first level detector further comprises a second temperature detector positioned proximate a bottom of the pour-over bag and configured to detect the temperature of the pour-over bag as the nozzle assembly pours the fluid into the pour-over bag, and wherein the second temperature detector is configured to turn on the pump when the temperature of the pour-over bag decreases below a second predetermined temperature.
Alexander teaches:
a method of determining the level of a hot beverage by using multiple temperature sensors arranged along the height of a vessel (¶441). The sensos may be located outside of a sidewall of the vessel (¶441, see Fig 50A). Where there is a substantial temperature difference between two adjacent sensors, the hot liquid level is determined to be between those sensors (¶442-¶443). The arrangement is applicable to a variety of food handling containers (¶445) and may use a variety of types of sensors (¶441 “any of the types of sensors disclosed herein”).
COMBINATION
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the coffee maker the combination based on Iue by including additional temperature sensors arranged along the height of the filter bag 4 of Iue, as taught by Alexander, to obtain the benefit of determining a more precise liquid level. Since Harrod teaches that a high liquid level stops the flow of liquid to prevent overflowing, it follows that a low liquid level, corresponding to a lower temperature at one of the lower temperature sensors, would be factor in causing the flow of water to start.
Regarding claim 6, the combination teaches:
the first temperature detector (Lowe 151, see Fig 3) is positioned above the holder (in Lowe, 151 is above top rim of 22, which corresponds to above the filter bag 4 in Iue).
Regarding claim 7, the combination teaches:
the second temperature detector is positioned below the holder (as taught by Alexander, the temperature sensors are arranged along the height of the liquid volume to be sensed).
Regarding claim 8, the combination teaches:
at least one of the first and second temperature detectors comprise at least one of a thermopile infrared sensor (Alexander ¶441 “any of the types of sensors disclosed herein,” ¶201 “infrared sensor”), thermistor (Alexander: ¶441 “Negative Temperature Coefficient (NTC) thermistors”) or thermocouple (Alexander ¶441 “thermocouple”).
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Ricker (US 304,238) teaches a coffee filter bag that may be provided with eyes or button-holes, and may be supported by hooking over suitable hooks or studs projecting either inward or outward from the support.
Chang (US 2017/0105569) discloses a coffee filter with a pair of slits 211 to allow hanging the filter from nips 212 of a holder configured to hang the filter over a pot or cup.
PNG
media_image3.png
682
496
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Pak (KR 20200062741) discloses a coffee filter with slits 310 for hanging.
PNG
media_image4.png
336
598
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Kim (KR 20200113924) teaches “the filter 130, that is, the support 133 provided on both sides of the filter body 131 may be formed with support holes 136 that receive such protrusions and engage with the protrusions, respectively. The support hole 136 may be formed in a slit shape to have a shape corresponding to the protrusion of a rectangular piece structure. By forming the support hole 136 at the end of the support 133 as described above, the filter 130 can be firmly supported by the main body 110 by hooking the support 133 to the protrusion, so that hot water is supplied to the internal space of the filter 130. In the process of extracting the poured coffee liquid 30, the filter 130 may be prevented from sagging into the extraction container 10 or falling from the main body 110 due to the load of hot water.”
PNG
media_image5.png
869
795
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Vangedal (WO 9307791) discloses a filter with holes 87 to allow hanging, e.g., to dry, after use.
PNG
media_image6.png
452
390
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 TOPAZ L ELLIOTT whose telephone number is (571)270-5851. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9 a.m. - 4 p.m. EST.
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 on (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.
/TOPAZ L. ELLIOTT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights