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 with traverse of Group I (claim 1-12) in the reply filed on March 23th 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the newly amended limitation in the independent claims would distinct from prior art CN110200502. This is not found persuasive because this application is a national stage application and the restriction is made under 37 CFR 1.475(a), PCT13.1 and PCT13.2, under “requirement of unity of invention”.
Group 1, 2 and 3 are still lack unity of invention because even though the invention of these groups required the technical feature of “…A beverage machine comprising: a liquid supply tank configured to hold a liquid for forming a beverage; a conduit that is fluidly coupled to the liquid supply tank and positioned such that, for at least some fill levels of the liquid supply tank, prior to initiation of a beverage cycle, a liquid level in the conduit corresponds to a liquid level in the liquid supply tank; a conductive probe positioned within the conduit and at a level in the conduit to detect presence and absence of liquid at the level in the conduit, the level being located at a vertical height that is between a bottom of the liquid supply tank and a maximum fill level of the liquid supply tank; and a pump positioned to move liquid from the liquid supply tank to the conduit and the conductive probe.…”, this technical features is not special technical feature as it does not make a contribution over the prior art in view of CN105411390B (refer to the 102 rejection below for detail).
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on July 18th 2023, June 25th 2025, August 6th 2025, March 6th 2026 and May 28th 2026 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-4 and 6-9 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, the terms “liquid” in line 7 and 9, should change to “the liquid”.
In claim 2, the term “liquid” in line 2, should change to “the liquid”.
In claim 3:
The term “liquid” in line 2, should change to “the liquid”.
The limitation “comprising a pump” should be removed.
In claim 4, the term “liquid” in line 3, should change to “the liquid”.
In claim 6, the term “liquid” in line 2, should change to “the liquid”.
In claim 7, the term “liquid” in line 2, should change to “the liquid”.
In claim 8, the term “liquid” in line 2, should change to “the liquid”.
In claim 9:
The term “liquid” in line 3, should change to “the liquid”.
The term “the sensor” in line 3, should change to “the conductive probe”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:.
Claim limitation “controller” in claims 5-9 has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses/they use a generic placeholder “controller" coupled with functional language “coupled to/ to receive/prohibit/provide/deactivate or reduce a heating rate” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. A review of the specification shows that, although it is not clear, the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation: The limitation “controller" has been described in Paragraph 0039-0043 as some kind of computer, control circuit, processor or microprocessor.
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 § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 1-6 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN105411390B herein set forth as CN1390B.
Regarding claim 1, CN1390B discloses a beverage machine (refer to fig.1) comprising:
a liquid supply tank (#21 and #22, fig.1) configured to hold a liquid (refer as “water” in the abstract) for forming a beverage (refer to the term “water fountain” in the abstract);
a conduit (#23, #281, #221, #12, #1, #11 and #211, fig.1) that is fluidly coupled to the liquid supply tank (#21 and #22, fig.1) and positioned such that, for at least some fill levels of the liquid supply tank (#21 and #22, fig.1), prior to initiation of a beverage cycle (refer to the water heating cycle of the CN1390B), a liquid level in the conduit (#23, #281, #221, #12, #1, #11 and #211, fig.1) corresponds to a liquid level in the liquid supply tank (#21 and #22, fig.1);
a conductive probe (#71, fig.1) positioned within the conduit (#23, #281, #221, #12, #1, #11 and #211, fig.1) and at a level in the conduit (#23, #281, #221, #12, #1, #11 and #211, fig.1) to detect presence and absence of liquid (refer as “water” in the abstract) at the level in the conduit (#23, #281, #221, #12, #1, #11 and #211, fig.1), the level being located at a vertical height (refer to the height of #71 in fig.1) that is between a bottom (refer to the bottom of #21 in fig.1) of the liquid supply tank (#21 and #22, fig.1) and a maximum fill level (refer as “highest water level” in abstract) of the liquid supply tank (#21 and #22, fig.1); and
a pump (#1, fig.1) positioned to move liquid (refer as “water” in the abstract) from the liquid supply tank (#21 and #22, fig.1) to the conduit (#23, #281, #221, #12, #1, #11 and #211, fig.1) and the conductive probe (#71, fig.1).
PNG
media_image1.png
656
491
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, CN1390B discloses substantially all features set forth in claim 1, CN1390B further discloses comprising a dispensing station (#24 and #241, fig.1), wherein the conduit (#23, #281, #221, #12, #1, #11 and #211, fig.1) comprises a liquid supply line (#281, fig.1) that supplies liquid (refer as “water” in the abstract) from the liquid supply tank (#21 and #22, fig.1) toward the dispensing station (#24 and #241, fig.1).
Regarding claim 3, CN1390B discloses substantially all features set forth in claim 1, CN1390B further discloses comprising a pump (#1, fig.1), wherein the conduit (#23, #281, #221, #12, #1, #11 and #211, fig.1) comprises a liquid supply line (#211 and #11 in fig.1) that supplies liquid (refer as “water” in the abstract) from the liquid supply tank (#21 and #22, fig.1) to the pump (#1, fig.1).
Regarding claim 4, CN1390B discloses substantially all features set forth in claim 1, CN1390B further discloses comprising a dispensing station (#24 and #241, fig.1); and
a liquid supply (#12 and #221 fig.1) line that supplies liquid (refer as “water” in the abstract) from the liquid supply tank (#21 and #22, fig.1) toward the dispensing station (#24 and #241, fig.1),
wherein the conduit (#23, fig.1) has a first end (#12, fig.1) and a second end (#221, fig.1), the first end (#12, fig.1) being fluidly coupled to the liquid supply tank (#21 and #22, fig.1), and
wherein the conduit (#23, fig.1) is separate and distinct from the liquid supply line (#12 and #221 fig.1).
Regarding claim 5, CN1390B discloses substantially all features set forth in claim 1, CN1390B further discloses comprising a controller (#5, fig.1) coupled to the conductive probe (#71, fig.1) and arranged to receive a signal (refer to NPL CN1390B’s machine translation Page 5, 2nd Paragraph cited: “…a water level sensor A71 and level sensor B72, two of them are installed on the water tank 2 and are respectively and electrically connected with the main control circuit board 5…”) from the conductive probe (#71, fig.1).
Regarding claim 6, CN1390B discloses substantially all features set forth in claim 5, CN1390B further discloses wherein the controller (#5, fig.1) prohibits operation of the beverage machine (refer to fig.1) when the conductive probe (#71, fig.1) detects absence of liquid (refer as “water” in the abstract) at the level in the conduit (#23, fig.1)(refer to NPL machine translated Page 5 2nd paragraph cited: “…a water level sensor set is connected with the main control circuit board 5 circuit is connected between the main control circuit board 5 receives the circuit-switched control signal and then control the heater 4 to start heating…”).
Regarding claim 9, CN1390B discloses substantially all features set forth in claim 5, CN1390B further discloses comprising a heater (#4, fig.1), wherein the controller (#5, fig.1) is arranged to deactivate a heating rate of the heater (#4, fig.1) when the sensor (#71, fig.1) detects (refer as “water” in the abstract) absence of liquid (refer as “water” in the abstract) at the level in the conduit (#23, fig.1) (refer to NPL machine translated Page 5 2nd paragraph cited: “…a water level sensor set is connected with the main control circuit board 5 circuit is connected between the main control circuit board 5 receives the circuit-switched control signal and then control the heater 4 to start heating…”).
Regarding claim 10, CN1390B discloses substantially all features set forth in claim 9, CN1390B further discloses wherein the heater (#4, fig.1) comprises an in-line heater (refer to #4 in fig.1 #4 heater is located inside #23 in fig.1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN105411390B herein set forth as CN1390B, in view of KWON et al (US2022/0146130A1) herein set forth as KWON.
Regarding claim 8, CN1390B discloses substantially all features set forth in claim 5, CN1390B further discloses when the conductive probe (#71, fig.1) detects absence of liquid (refer as “water” in the abstract) at the level in the conduit (#23, fig.1) (refer to NPL machine translated Page 5 2nd paragraph cited: “…a water level sensor set is connected with the main control circuit board 5 circuit is connected between the main control circuit board 5 receives the circuit-switched control signal and then control the heater 4 to start heating…”).
CN1390B does not explicitly disclose wherein the controller is arranged to provide an indication to a user.
In the field of water level detection and controlling, KWON discloses wherein the controller (refer to Paragraph 0308 cited: “…The humidification module controller 3310 outputs a no-water notification to supply water when there is no water in the water tank or the water level is equal to or less than a certain level…”) is arranged to provide an indication to a user (refer to Paragraph 0123 cited: “…The display module 1500 is partially exposed through the front panel 210 and may provide the visual information to the user on the exposed display…”).
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 CN1390B’s controller with wherein the controller is arranged to provide an indication to a user, as taught by KWON, in order to provide a more accurate control of the water level and maintain the required water level without complex system.
Claims 7 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN105411390B herein set forth as CN1390B.
Regarding claim 7, CN1390B discloses substantially all features set forth in claim 1, CN1390B further discloses wherein the controller (#5, fgi.1) is arranged to prohibit activation (refer to NPL machine translation Page 4-6 cited: “…the main control circuit board 5 set on the water pump mounting cavity 6 and electrically connected with the external power supply, which can receive the operation start signal from the panel 8 to control water pump 1 and the electric heater 4 started in order, which can receiving the operation stop signal from the panel 8 to control water pump 1 and heater 4 off…”) of the pump (#1, fig.1); the conductive probe (#71, fig.1) detects absence of liquid (refer as “water” in the abstract) at the level in the conduit (#23, fig.1) (refer to NPL machine translated Page 5 2nd paragraph cited: “…a water level sensor set is connected with the main control circuit board 5 circuit is connected between the main control circuit board 5 receives the circuit-switched control signal and then control the heater 4 to start heating…”).
CN1390B does not explicitly disclose wherein the controller is arranged to prohibit activation of the pump when the conductive probe detects absence of liquid at the level in the conduit.
However, 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 wherein the controller is arranged to prohibit activation of the pump when the conductive probe detects absence of liquid at the level in the conduit, for that is well known within one of ordinary skill in the art as the matter of design choice or desired application, refer to In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) and In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975). Since the applicant does not state what problem solve or benefit of such limitation, one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected applicant’s invention to perform equally well with CN1390B’s teaching.
Regarding claim 11, CN1390B discloses substantially all features set forth in claim 1, CN1390B further discloses wherein the conductive probe is downstream of the liquid supply tank.
CN1390B does not discloses wherein the conductive probe is upstream of the pump.
However, 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 conductive probe is upstream of the pump, it is well known to a person skilled in the art as rearrangement of parts refer to MPEP 2144.04.VI.C. In order to ensure when the pump run there is water for the pump to move and such that would not burn the pump by running the pump without and water.
Regarding claim 12, CN1390B discloses substantially all features set forth in claim 9, CN1390B further discloses wherein the liquid supply tank (#21 and #22, fig.1) has a maximum fill level at a first height (refer to the height of #29 in fig.1) and the pump (#1, fig.1) is positioned at a second height (refer to the pump #1 position in fig.1) that is above the first height.
CN1390B does not explicitly disclose the second height is above the first height.
However, 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 second height is above the first height, it is well known to a person skilled in the art as rearrangement of parts refer to MPEP 2144.04.VI.C. In order to ensure when the pump is not running there is no water will pass through the pump, such that there would not be any water leakage form the liquid supply tank through the pump.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
SHIN (US2022/0057087A1) discloses a steam generator for cooking.
HANANO (US2018/0280552A1) discloses a beverage brewing method.
ORITA (US2015/0344281A1) discloses a water dispenser.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YEONG JUEN THONG whose telephone number is (571)272-6930. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday.
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, Steven W. Crabb can be reached at 5712705095. 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.
/YEONG JUEN THONG/Examiner, Art Unit 3761 August 20th 2026
/PHUONG T NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights