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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In ¶62 at line 4, “wall 221” should be corrected to -wall 211-.
In ¶63 at line 3, “first web 223” should be corrected to -first web 221-.
In ¶63 at line 5, “second web 22” should be corrected to -second web 222-.
In ¶66 at line 5, “base part 221” should be corrected to -base part 21-.
In ¶66 at line 7, “wall 221” should be corrected to -wall 211-.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
No claim limitations are interpreted under 112(f).
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 23-25 and 28 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 23 recites “the snap connection.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, rendering the claim indefinite. This limitation is introduced in claim 22.
Clam 25 recites “a projection (225) for engaging in a corresponding recess.” These terms are previously introduced in claim 23. It is not clear whether claim 25 requires new instances of the projection and the recess, or whether it further limits the previously recited ones. For the purpose of examination, the limitation has been interpreted as and may be corrected to --a second projection (225) for engaging in a second corresponding recess--.
Regarding claim 28, the phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
The remaining rejected claims are rejected for their dependence on an indefinite claim.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Forest (US 2021/0130039).
PNG
media_image1.png
338
565
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 15, Forest discloses:
An expandable infusion container (100) for receiving a dried infusion substance for preparation of an infusion beverage (this is an intended use. The package of Forest is capable of this because it can contain hot water, ¶2), comprising a base part (floor 101), a lid part (lid 105, ¶39) and a wall part (peripheral wall 103, ¶35) connecting the base part (at 103L, ¶35) and the lid part (at 103T, ¶39), wherein the wall part (103) has a variable length (see Fig 1A vs Fig 1B, ¶36-¶37) and is fastened with a first end (103L) to the base part (101, ¶35) and is connected with a second end (103T) to the lid part (105, ¶39), wherein the lid part (105) and the base part (101) are connected to one another via a destructible guarantee seal (107, see Figs 1A-1C, ¶40).
Regarding claim 16, Forest discloses:
the guarantee seal is configured as a tear-off film (¶93-¶94 “plastic wrap”).
Regarding claim 17, Forest discloses:
the guarantee seal is configured as a plurality of tear-off webs (see three elements 107 in Fig 1C, ¶40 “ripped”).
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.
Claims 15, 17, and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nordskog (US 4,867,993).
PNG
media_image2.png
337
630
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
275
559
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 15, Nordskog (US 4,867,993) discloses:
An expandable (col 3 lines 4-10, see Figs 1 and 2) infusion container (10) for receiving a dried infusion substance for preparation of an infusion beverage (col 2 lines 52-55), comprising a base part (18), a [top] part (open top 22) and a wall part (sidewall 20) connecting the base part and the lid part (see Figs 1-2), wherein the wall part (sidewall 20) has a variable length (col 3 lines 4-10, see Figs 1 and 2) and is fastened with a first end to the base part and is connected with a second end to the [top] part (at 22, see Figs 1-2), wherein the [top] part (22) and the base part (18) are connected to one another via a destructible guarantee seal (adhesive strips 34, see Fig 2, col 3 lines 11-20).
Nordskog does not disclose a full lid in the embodiment of Figs 1 and 2. However, Nordskog teaches peelable closures over the top and bottom drain hole (col 3 lines 56-57), that are compatible with all embodiments of the invention (col 2 lines13-16, see claim 1, section (b)). One of ordinary skill is aware that such a seal can keep the infusible material fresh.
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 chamber of Nordskog by including a peelable seal at the open top and bottom of the brewing chamber to obtain the benefit of keeping the infusible material fresh.
Regarding claim 17, Nordskog discloses:
the guarantee seal is configured as a plurality of tear-off webs (adhesive strips 34, see Fig 2, col 3 lines 11-20).
Regarding claim 28, Nordskog discloses:
a filter sieve (filter bag 14 secured to bottom 18, col 2 line 64 – col 3 line 3) is arranged inside the infusion container, wherein the filter sieve is preferably arranged on the base part.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 18-22 and 26-27 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.
Claims 23-25 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claims 18 and 22, Nordskog and Forest are generally made of paper with a separate adhesive seal strip and are not conducive to an integral seal or a projection. Regarding claim 19, Nordskog and Forest do not disclose “the wall (211) is divided by the guarantee seal (24) into a base ring (212) and a separating ring (213).”
Regarding claim 26, an inlet or outlet valve would not improve the process of making instant noodles (Forest) or pour-over coffee (Nordskog).
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Regarding claim 15, Malone (US 2010/0183773) discloses:
An expandable infusion container (10) for receiving a dried infusion substance for preparation of an infusion beverage (This is an intended use. The package of Malone is capable of this at least in the instance where it is made of plastics, see ¶50, ¶56, and ¶63), comprising a base part (14), a lid part (cover assembly 18 with top portion 64 and cover 78) and a wall part (sidewall 16) connecting the base part (¶65) and the lid part (¶68), wherein the wall part (sidewall 16) has a variable length (¶63, see Fig 18 vs Fig 3, ¶90, ¶35-¶39) and is fastened with a first end (60) to the base part (24/14, ¶65) and is connected with a second end (62) to the lid part (¶68), wherein the lid part (cover 18 at 64) and the base part (14) are connected to one another via a destructible guarantee seal (130, see Fig 22, ¶94-¶96).
PNG
media_image4.png
940
739
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Ferrara (US 2009/0229472) discloses a brewing cup wherein the brewing material is contained within a bellows.
PNG
media_image5.png
515
757
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Zeng (CN 202828560 U) discloses an expandable brewing body.
PNG
media_image6.png
728
526
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Wiesner (DE 3922415 A1) disclose a pour-over coffee capsule with accordion folded sides for saving space.
PNG
media_image7.png
363
488
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
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