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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1 and 12 are amended. Claims 2-11 are as previously presented. Therefore, claims 1-12 are currently pending and have been considered below.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on April 09, 2026 has been entered. Applicant’s amendment overcomes the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) interpretation of claim 12.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 4-6, filed on 04/09/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-12 under U.S.C. 102 and 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of applicant’s amendment regarding the filter holder being removable and transferred between grinding and compressing steps to two different areas and newly found prior art.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. KR10-2019-0020140, filed on 02/20/2019.
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means”:
Claim 1, “pressing means”, where the pressing means is interpreted from applicant’s Specification, Page 8, “Advantageously, the continuity of the inner perimeter wall 13 of the sleeve 11 with the matching inner perimeter wall 24 of the filter 21 guarantees a slidable and correct guide of the pressing means along a common pressing axis”, where the pressing means is a device that is slidable and guided into the portafilter in order to press down upon the coffee grounds.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claims 1-2 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grassia et al. (US 20160128507 A1, hereinafter Grassia) in view of Abbiati (CN 108143278 A).
Regarding claim 1, Grassia discloses a coffee grinding apparatus comprising a coffee grinder, comprising (Para. 0025, “the motorised augur is adjacent to, below or at least co-operates with a coffee grinder 20.”), a removable filter holder (Para. 0024, “The portafilter holder is adapted to retain and release the portafilter assembly 18”) and a cradle positioned below the coffee grinder (Para. 0024, “The augur head 16 is generally above and within a portafilter holder 17.”),
where said filter holder has a longitudinal handle (Fig. 1, where the filter holder or portafilter assembly 18 includes a longitudinal handle),
wherein the removable filter holder comprises, a cup having an upper mouth (Para. 0036, “the portafilter 141”, and Fig. 14, where the portafilter 141 is shown to be a cup with an upper opening or mouth),
a filter housed in said cup (Para. 0002, “the portafilter or a removable filter basket carried by the portafilter.”, where the portafilter can include a filter basket) and a plurality of flaps which extend externally to said cup (Para. 0036, “portafilter 141 has an upper rim on which is formed one or more outwardly extending tabs 142.”),
where said cradle has above said filter holder a support shelf (Para. 0037, “A co-operating fixing post 151 is located on a housing 152 or otherwise adjacent to but not connected to the ring 143.”, where the housing 152 is the support shelf of the cradle) delimiting an opening permitting the passage of the ground coffee (Para. 0026, “Once the fill level within the filter basket reaches the under side of the augur head 22, the addition of coffee grounds results in a compaction of the coffee in the filter basket or portafilter, that is below the lower surface of the augur head 22.”, and Fig. 15, where the housing 152 includes a structure with openings for letting in the ground coffee),
where below said cradle is disposed an actuator actuating an activation switch of said coffee grinder (Para. 0036, “The ring has an activation tab 147 when the ring is rotated, the leading edge of the activation tab 147 depresses the mechanical contact 148 of the micro switch 140. The subsequent or electrical contact within the micro switch 140 is used by the device's microprocessor to initiate the action of the auger.”, where the actuator is the micro switch 140),
where a removable accessory contains the dispersion of ground coffee flowing towards said filter of said removable filter holder (Para. 0037, “As shown in FIG. 15, the intermediate ring 143 has fixing posts, in this example one or more vertical fixing posts 150.”, where the intermediate ring 143 contains the ground coffee going into the portafilter as the intermediate ring is connected to delivery chute 21),
said removable accessory being formed by a sleeve connecting said opening in said support shelf to said upper mouth of said cup (Modified Fig. 15, where the sleeve that forms the removable accessory is shown and is connected to the intermediate ring 143),
said sleeve having a lower release and quick couple to said upper mouth of said cup (Para. 0036, “portafilter 141 has an upper rim on which is formed one or more outwardly extending tabs 142. These tabs are inserted into co-operating slots in the female component of a bayonet mechanism that holds the portafilter during coffee extraction. In this example, an intermediate ring 143 has one or more integral bumpers 144.”, where the bumper to tab connection is a quick system done through rotation, where the intermediate ring is part of the sleeve structure) and a removable upper engagement with same support shelf (Para. 0037, “the intermediate ring 143 has fixing posts, in this example one or more vertical fixing posts 150. A co-operating fixing post 151 is located on a housing 152 or otherwise adjacent to but not connected to the ring 143.”, where there is an upper engagement with the support shelf through the fixing posts on the intermediate ring), said removable upper engagement comprising a perimeter flange resting on said support shelf (Modified Fig. 15, where the vertical fixing posts 150 rests on the support shelf or the housing 152, where the housing 152 also has posts 151 and where the posts 151 and 150 engage with each other through the tension spring 153; where the fixing post 150 is construed to be a flange or an upward projecting rib),
said sleeve being configured and arranged to interact with said actuator below said perimeter flange (Para. 0036, “Further rotation of the portafilter handle 146 causes a rotation of the ring 143. The ring has an activation tab 147 when the ring is rotated, the leading edge of the activation tab 147 depresses the mechanical contact 148 of the micro switch 140.”, where the sleeve includes the ring 143 with the activation tab 147, where the activation tab interacts with the actuator of the micro switch 140; where the activation tab 147 and micro switch 140 are located below the perimeter flange or fixing posts 150 as the fixing posts extend upwards),
said filter holder equipped with the removable accessory being configured and adapted to (i) be grasped by the user by the longitudinal handle (Para. 0036, “Further rotation of the portafilter handle 146 causes a rotation of the ring 143.”), (ii) engaged with the coffee grinding apparatus with an axial advancement movement in the direction of the longitudinal axis of the handle, then with the envisaged dose of ground dry coffee (Claim 16, “a motorised coffee grinder discharges above the auger head; a female component of a bayonet holds the portafilter under the auger head; the female component has adjacent to it, a switch that can be activated by the action of a portafilter, the switch being used to start the device; the mechanism is used to stop a motor of a coffee grinder; and a timer initiated by the mechanism delays the stopping of the action of the auger motor after the stopping of a motor of a coffee grinder that has also stopped in response to the activation of the mechanism.”).
PNG
media_image1.png
626
669
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Modified Figure 15, Grassia
Grassia does not disclose:
the filter holder with removably accessory is (iii) removed from the coffee grinding apparatus with axial movement contrary to the advancement movement, then (iv) translated by the user to a grounds pressing station equipped with pressing means, where the sleeve of the removable accessory contains any further dispersions of dry grounds between the pressing means and the filter in the cup.
However, Abbiati discloses, in the similar field of coffee grinding apparatuses (Abstract, “dispensing coffee grinding powder”), where the filter holder is removed from the coffee grinding apparatus with axial movement contrary to the advancement movement (Page 5, Para. 6 from end, “filter tower 21 is further configured with a first position A, as shown in FIG. 2, in the position A, corresponding to the basket 20 located at 23 and ready to receive the predetermined dose of coffee grinding powder outlet of pipeline 16.”, where at the first position A, the portafilter is moved into position through an advancement movement towards the coffee machine, where moving the portafilter from position A to position B requires removal from position A through an axial movement contrary to the advancement movement towards the coffee machine), where the filter holder is translated by the user to a grounds pressing station equipped with pressing means (Page 5, Para. 5 from end, “the supporting piece 24 can also be configured as fumes filter 21 defines a second position B, as shown in FIG. 1 so that fumes filter of the device 12, the device 12 for compressing the filter tower is in pipe 16 below the first position A in the 20 receives a dose of coffee grinding powder.”). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the filter holder with removable accessory in Grassia to be removable between a ground coffee dispensing stage and a pressing stage as taught by Abbiati, where the containment of the dry coffee grounds is always achieved with the removable accessory from Grassia, where a user can choose to allow coffee grounds without turning the portafilter to activate the auger from Grassia, where then the user would remove the portafilter to bring it to another pressing station as taught by Abbiati.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of allowing for grinding and pressing movements of the coffee machine to be separated, which can prevent defects from occurring that cause partial loss of coffee due to the pestle and altering the beverage taste, as stated by Abbiati, Page 3, Para. 3-5 from end, “although the prior art use of a single device to use a dose of coffee grinding powder filling tower filter basket and further compress the certain dosage while maintaining position of the tower filter does not change the two operation periods, but that actually cause the following defects in current technology:…a quantity of coffee grind powder dose in each dispensing event to the basket of a fumes filter change and compression on coffee grinding powder. This is because the surface of the helical element of partial coffee lost to the pestle and adhered together, and with the surface of the spiral element so as not to form the amount of the design that contribute to be compressed. Because the preparation dosage of concentrated coffee only is grams, so the amount of loss for even very small and is not controllable or cause is not satisfactory, dispensing of beverage taste is not the same.”.
Regarding claim 2, modified Grassia teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, as set forth above, discloses wherein said sleeve interacts with said actuator (Grassia, Para. 0036, “Further rotation of the portafilter handle 146 causes a rotation of the ring 143. The ring has an activation tab 147 when the ring is rotated, the leading edge of the activation tab 147 depresses the mechanical contact 148 of the micro switch 140.”) at a recess delimited between said outer upper perimeter flange of said sleeve (Grassia, Fig. 15, where the outer upper perimeter flange of the sleeve is the fixing post 150) and an outer lower perimeter flange of said sleeve (Grassia, Fig. 14, where the outer lower perimeter flange on the sleeve is the bumper 144, where the micro switch 140 and activation tab 147 is located vertically between the fixing post 150 and bumper 144) which on an opposite side to a side turned towards said outer upper perimeter flange supports said release and quick couple (Grassia, Para. 0036, “portafilter 141 has an upper rim on which is formed one or more outwardly extending tabs 142. These tabs are inserted into co-operating slots in the female component of a bayonet mechanism that holds the portafilter during coffee extraction. In this example, an intermediate ring 143 has one or more integral bumpers 144.”, where the bumpers or bumpers 144 are on an opposite side compared to the side turned towards the outer upper perimeter flange or the fixing post, where the bumpers 144 supports the quick couple of the sleeve to the portafilter through the rotation of the extending tabs 142 and bumpers 144).
Regarding claim 12, modified Grassia teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, as set forth above, discloses wherein said filter holder is removably engageable with an infusion head of the coffee machine (Grassia, Claim 16, “a female component of a bayonet holds the portafilter
under the auger head”, where the bayonet is part of the infusion head of the coffee machine, Para. 0026, “The ground coffee is thus deposited through the auger and, in this way, fills the
portafilter or filter basket from the bottom up.”, where the auger is construed as an infusion head as it infuses or introduces into the portafilter a new material of ground coffee) by way of said flaps including a front flap and a pair of rear flaps (Grassia, Para. 0036, “portafilter 141 has an upper rim on which is formed one or more outwardly extending tabs 142… After the initial insertion of the portafilter into the female bayonet component, rotation of the handle, generally in a anti-clockwise motion (when seen from above) causes the front edge 145 of a tab 142 to contact a trailing edge of a bumper 144.”, where there can be multiple flaps or tabs on the portafilter, where those flaps can be all around the perimeter of the cylindrical portafilter and be located on the front and rear).
Claims 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grassia et al. (US 20160128507 A1, hereinafter Grassia) in view of Abbiati (CN 108143278 A) in further view of Leung et al. (US 8479638 B2, hereinafter Leung).
Regarding claim 3, modified Grassia teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, as set forth above, discloses wherein said perimeter flange extends along the outer perimeter of said sleeve (Grassia, Modified Fig. 15, where the post 150 on the perimeter flange extends upwards along the outer perimeter of the sleeve).
Modified Grassia does not disclose:
where the perimeter flange extends along the outer perimeter of an upper base of the sleeve.
However, Leung discloses, in the similar field of coffee grinding apparatuses (Section 1, line 28, “mounted on coffee grinding machines”), where a perimeter flange can include a flange that extends along the upper base of a sleeve (Section 2, lines 66-67, “a guard 5 for defining a passageway underneath the tamping base 2 to confine the coffee grounds”, and modified Fig. 8, where the upper part of the flange is shown). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the perimeter flange in modified Grassia to include an upper part of the perimeter flange as taught by Leung.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to use an additional flange in the upper section, which can be used to add structures that a user could desire like a cover to the portafilter, as stated by Leung, Section 3, lines 47-50, “At the other end of the guard 5, a joint 9, preferably, a hinge joint, connects the cover 8 to the guard 5. The cover 8 can be pivoted between open and close positions as shown in FIGS. 4 and 5.”.
PNG
media_image2.png
408
673
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Modified Figure 8, Leung
Regarding claim 4, modified Grassia teaches the apparatus according to claim 3, as set forth above, discloses wherein said perimeter flange has a horizontal flat lower surface resting along a horizontal flat upper surface of said support shelf which surrounds said opening (Grassia, modified Fig. 15, where the perimeter flange is shown to have a horizontal flat lower surface that rests on the horizontal flat upper surface of the support shelf, where this is done to allow for the tension spring 153 to connect the posts on the perimeter flange and the support shelf).
PNG
media_image3.png
568
848
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Modified Figure 15.1, Grassia
Claims 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grassia et al. (US 20160128507 A1, hereinafter Grassia) in view of Abbiati (CN 108143278 A) in further view of Abbiati (ES 2742123 T3, hereinafter Abbiati ES).
Regarding claim 5, modified Grassia teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, as set forth above.
Modified Grassia does not disclose:
wherein said cradle has an anti-tip shelf preventing the tipping of said removable accessory.
However, Abbiati ES discloses, in the similar field of coffee grinding apparatuses (Abstract, “an espresso machine with a predetermined dose of ground coffee and for pressing it inside the filter holder”), where the cradle can include an anti-tip shelf that prevents tipping of the removable accessory (Page 6, Para. 7, “According to this embodiment, the support 24 comprises the side walls 60 and 61, connected in a cantilever fashion to the wall 15 of the internal frame of the apparatus”). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the cradle in modified Grassia to include the anti-tip shelf of the side walls connected to the apparatus in a cantilever fashion as taught by Abbiati ES.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to use support arms to secure the cradle, where the use of cantilevered support arms allows for the cradle to be overhung without the need for external support, which is a feature of cantilevered supports, as stated by Abbiati ES, Page 6, Para. 7, “According to this embodiment, the support 24 comprises the side walls 60 and 61, connected in a cantilever fashion to the wall 15 of the internal frame of the apparatus”.
Regarding claim 6, modified Grassia teaches the apparatus according to claim 5, as set forth above, discloses wherein said anti-tip shelf is configured and arranged to interact with said perimeter flange (Grassia, Modified Fig. 15, where the vertical fixing posts 150 rests on the support shelf or the housing 152, where the housing 152 also has posts 151 and where the posts 151 and 150 engage with each other through the tension spring 153; where the fixing post 150 is construed to be a flange or an upward projecting rib; where the support shelf is part of the cradle and engages with the perimeter flange; teaching from Abbiati, where the support shelf of the cradle would be connected to the anti-tip or cantilevered support arms, which would then interact with the perimeter flange).
Claims 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grassia et al. (US 20160128507 A1, hereinafter Grassia) in view of Abbiati (CN 108143278 A) in further view of Yamamoto et al. (WO 2018042569 A1, hereinafter Yamamoto).
Regarding claim 7, modified Grassia teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, as set forth above.
Modified Grassia does not disclose:
wherein said sleeve has an inner perimeter wall matching up with an inner perimeter wall of said filter.
However, Yamamoto discloses, in the similar field of coffee grinding apparatuses (Abstract, “a coffee bean grinder with which ground coffee beans can be transferred to a portafilter”), where the sleeve that goes into the portafilter has an inner perimeter wall that matches the inner perimeter wall of the portafilter (Page 3, last Para., “The contact member 50b is attached to a thread formed on the outer peripheral portion of the lower end of the tapered portion 42 so that the filter basket 53 is brought into close contact with the hanging portion 501”, and where the shape matches, Page 6, Para. 5, “small hole part 44 was provided in the taper part 42, not only this but a large cylindrical hole may be provided in the taper part 42”, where the tapered portion 42 has an inner perimeter wall that matches the inner perimeter wall of the filter basket 53). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the sleeve’s inner perimeter wall in modified Grassia to be matching with the inner perimeter wall of the filter as taught by Yamamoto.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to ensure that the ground coffee does not fall into gaps between the filter and the sleeve, as stated by Yamamoto, Page 3, Para. 1, “In this way, when the filter basket 63 is brought into close contact, an inclined portion 502 that is curved along the inner wall surface of the filter basket 63 is provided so that coffee beans do not enter the gap with the hanging portion 501. Yes. This prevents coffee beans falling from above from entering the gap with the upper surface of the filter basket 63.”.
Regarding claim 8, modified Grassia teaches the apparatus according to claim 7, as set forth above, discloses wherein said inner perimeter wall and said matching inner perimeter wall are cylindrical (Teaching from Yamamoto, Page 6, Para. 5, “small hole part 44 was provided in the taper part 42, not only this but a large cylindrical hole may be provided in the taper part 42”).
Claims 9-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grassia et al. (US 20160128507 A1, hereinafter Grassia) in view of Abbiati (CN 108143278 A) in further view of Bakke et al. (CN 108882803 A, hereinafter Bakke).
Regarding claim 9, modified Grassia teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, as set forth above.
Modified Grassia does not disclose:
wherein said release and quick couple comprises elastically yielding engagement seats for said flaps.
However, Bakke discloses, in the similar field of coffee grinding apparatuses (Page 4, Para. 4, “ground coffee”), where the engagement seats for the flaps are elastic (Page 7, Para. 3 from end, “This enables bar bartender especially easily and make the filter holder supporting piece 22 of the guide 30 can be seen along the filter holder supporting piece 22 of guides 30 slide filter holder 1 of the flange 5.”, and Page 7, last Para., “the filter holder 1 is guided during movement of teeth 32 elastically retract into the corresponding seat part, and the filter holder 1 reaches its elastically moved the filter holder supporting piece 22 of the bottom position.”). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the engagement seat of the sleeve in modified Grassia to be elastic as taught by Bakke.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to use the elastic engagement seat to prevent the portafilter from sliding, where the this can secure the portafilter, as stated by Bakke, Page 8, Para. 1, “teeth 32 elastic force is weak, and the waiter of forcing the filter holder 1 reaches the desired position without any difficulty. However, the advantage is that teeth 32 elastic force are sufficient to apply holding effect to prevent the filter holder slide along the inclined guide (during inserting and extracting filter holder) under any condition.”.
Regarding claim 10, modified Grassia teaches the apparatus according to claim 9, as set forth above, discloses wherein said elastically yielding engagement seats extend along the outer perimeter of a lower base of said sleeve (Grassia, Para. 0036, “portafilter 141 has an upper rim on which is formed one or more outwardly extending tabs 142. These tabs are inserted into co-operating slots in the female component of a bayonet mechanism that holds the portafilter during coffee extraction. In this example, an intermediate ring 143 has one or more integral bumpers 144.”, where the bumper to tab connection is a quick system done through rotation, where the intermediate ring is part of the sleeve structure; where the flaps are the extending tabs 142, where the engagement seats for the flaps are the bumpers 144; teaching from Bakke, where the bumpers can be elastic teeth in order to secure the portafilter; where in the combined apparatus of Grassia and Bakke, the elastic teeth would be located where the bumpers are, which from Grassia Fig. 14 are shown to be along the perimeter of a lower base of the sleeve as the intermediate ring that the bumpers are located on is part of the sleeve).
Regarding claim 11, modified Grassia teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, as set forth above, discloses an alternative configuration where the removable accessory does not need to be used with the portafilter (Grassia, Para. 0037, “It would be appreciated that various spring arrangements between the intermediate ring and any adjacent structure may be used to anchor the ends of a resilient spring or other bias member to accomplish the return action of the intermediate ring. In other embodiments, the tabs 142 of the portafilter make contact the switch or micro switch 140 in other ways including direct contact or contact through a flexible membrane (not shown).”, where direct contact of the tabs 142 of the portafilter can be used instead of needing the sleeve with the tension spring)
Modified Grassia does not disclose:
further comprising a use configuration without said removable accessory in which said flaps are engaged resting on said support shelf and said cup interacts with said actuator for activating the switch.
However, Bakke discloses where the flaps of a portafilter can be engaged with a support shelf of the cradle of the apparatus (Page 7, Para. 3 from end, “This enables bar bartender especially easily and make the filter holder supporting piece 22 of the guide 30 can be seen along the filter holder supporting piece 22 of guides 30 slide filter holder 1 of the flange 5.”), and where the portafilter interacts with the actuator for activating the switch (Page 8, Para. 3-4 from end, “locking position. in this position, the extending pin 60 stably inserted in the second concave part 58 and cannot be removed unless the bartender by bar performs the further unlocking movement. This is to ensure a stable position for the bartender and machine bar 100 security state. According to some embodiments, a device for signal sending locking mechanism completely closed. These devices can include, for example, micro-switch, the micro-switch connection to other electronic components (such as CPU) machine to allow distribution and the piston move downwards.”, where the portafilter is inserted into the cradle and supported through the flange or flaps, where the portafilter is then rotated in a dispensing position). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the portafilter in modified Grassia to not require the removable accessory in order to function as taught by Bakke.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to allow a bartender to have an easier time with inserting the portafilter, where one sliding motion is all that is needed and there is no need to interact with a removable accessory with a tension spring, as stated by Bakke, Page 7, Para. 3 from end, “This enables bar bartender especially easily and make the filter holder supporting piece 22 of the guide 30 can be seen along the filter holder supporting piece 22 of guides 30 slide filter holder 1 of the flange 5.”.
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 KEVIN GUANHUA WEN whose telephone number is (571)272-9940 and whose email is kevin.wen@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10:00 am - 6:00 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, 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.
/KEVIN GUANHUA WEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
06/25/2026
Prosecution Insights