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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/10/2025 is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 12/17/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 3-8 under §35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) 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 Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.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 CA 2058854 A – Myers in view of US 20230339235 A1 - Jacobi. Jacobi does teach the removable insulator is textured so as to provide a plurality of first air pockets between the warming plate and the receptacle, the plurality of first air pockets being separated from each other in a plan view of the warming plate.
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.
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.
Claims 1 and 4-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CA 2058854 A – Myers in view of US 20230339235 A1 - Jacobi.
Regarding claim 1, Myers is directed towards a hot and cold coffee machine. Myers does teach a hot water source for providing hot water for brewing (Figure 2, page 8 Ln. 1-10), a warming plate for warming a receptacle for receiving coffee ([Page 10 Ln. 9-11] shown at the bottom of Fig. 3 10 is placed on the warmer plate 24 to isolate the bottom of the carafe from the warmer plate.), a heating element for heating both water at the hot water source and the warming plate ([Pg. 7 Ln. 6-9] A flow-through heater 22 of conventional design is controlled from • a single pole-double throw switch 23 to both heat water received from the tank 18 and simultaneously heat a surface designated herein as a warmer plate), a removable insulator for insulating the warming plate from the receptacle, wherein the removable insulator insulates the warming plate from the receptacle in an iced coffee configuration and wherein the removable insulator is removed from the warming plate in a hot coffee configuration (See Fig. 1-2, the iced coffee configuration is shown wherein the removable insulator 48 is shown between the receptacle 30 and the warming plate 24 and See Fig. 1-2, the hot coffee configuration is shown to be when the removable insulator 48 is removed from between the receptacle 30 and the warming plate 24.).
Myers does not expressly teach the removable insulator is textured so as to provide a plurality of first air pockets between the warming plate and the receptacle, the plurality of first air pockets being separated from each other in a plan view of the warming plate.
Jacobi is directed towards a vertical axis mechanism. Jacobi does teach the removable insulator is textured so as to provide a plurality of first air pockets between the warming plate and the receptacle, the plurality of first air pockets being separated from each other in a plan view (Figure 2B element 45, it can be seen in the figure that there is multiple air pockets within the base plate 45).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the invention to the removable insulator is textured so as to provide a plurality of first air pockets between the warming plate and the receptacle, the plurality of first air pockets being separated from each other in a plan view by Jacobi in the system of Myers, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) would have understood that the removable insulator is textured so as to provide a plurality of first air pockets between the warming plate and the receptacle, the plurality of first air pockets being separated from each other in a plan view of Jacobi could be predictably used in a variety of systems, including the well-known system of Myers in a manner which would have predictably allowing for easy cleaning of the pad. Moreover, there is no indication in the instant application that any special steps or devices were devised or that any surprising results were derived from simply using the removable insulator is textured so as to provide a plurality of first air pockets between the warming plate and the receptacle, the plurality of first air pockets being separated from each other in a plan view of Jacobi with the well-known system of Myers.
Regarding claim 4, Myers and Jacobi does teach the limitations of claim 1. Myers does teach the warming plate has a raised border, and wherein the removable insulator is sized to fit within the raised border (See Fig. 2, there is shown to be a raised border surrounding the warmer plate 24 and See Fig. 2, the removable insulator 48 is shown within the raised border.).
Regarding claim 5, Myers and Jacobi does teach the limitations of claim 4. Myers does teach the receptacle (Fig. 1-3, element 30), and wherein the receptacle has a base section sized to fit within the raised border (See Fig. 2, the receptacle 30 is shown to have a base section at a bottom of the receptacle that is shown to fit within the raised border.), and wherein the receptacle has a body with a cross section larger than an area within the raised border (See Fig. 2, the receptacle is also shown to have a body section that is shown to have a cross section that is larger than an area within the raised border.), and wherein the receptacle has a shoulder segment linking the body with the base section (See Fig. 2, the body section and the base section of the receptacle 30 are shown to connect to one another at a shoulder section.).
Regarding claim 6, Myers and Jacobi does teach the limitations of claim 1. Myers does teach a water source (Fig. 2, reservoir 18, page 7, In. 1-3), and wherein the hot water source comprises a hose (Fig. 2, conduit or line 39, page 8 In. 2-10) extending from the water source to a brewing chamber ("a conduit or line 39 which extends from the bottom of the tank 18 to a port 28 above the brewing chamber 26", page 8 In. 3-5), and wherein a portion of the hose is integrated into or located adjacent the heating element (See Fig. 2, the line 39 is shown to pass through a portion of the heater 22.), such that water in the hose is heated prior to reaching the brewing chamber ("The heater 22 is of the continuous flow-through type so that, as long as the heater remains on, any water from the tank 18 will flow into the area around the heater 22 and, upon reaching the boiling point, is forced upwardly in line 39 and spurts out of the port 28 into the brewing chamber 26.", page 8 In. 5-10)
Regarding claim 7, Myers and Jacobi does teach the limitations of claim 6. Myers does teach the heating element is located between the portion of the hose and the warming plate (See Fig. 2, heating element 22 is shown to be disposed between the line 39 and the warmer plate 24.).
Regarding claim 8, Myers and Jacobi does teach the limitations of claim 7. Myers does teach the heating element is an elongated element fixed to a lower surface of the warming plate (See Fig. 2, the heater 22 is shown to be an elongated element extending the width of the plate 24, and is shown to be fixed with the lower surface of the warmer plate 24.).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CA 2058854 A – Myers and US 20230339235 A1 – Jacobi in view of US 4356381 A - Flaherty, Jr.
Regarding claim 2, Myers and Jacobi does teach the limitations of claim 1. Myers does not expressly teach the removable insulator is a silicone pad.
Flaherty, Jr is directed towards a brewing device. Flaherty, Jr does teach the removable insulator is a silicone pad ([Col. 2 Ln. 16] a pad 40 of temperature-resistant silicone.).
Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself. That is in the substitution of a silicon pad of Flaherty, Jr for a trivet of Myers. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
Person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) would have understood that the removable insulator is a silicone pad of Flaherty, Jr could be predictably used in a variety of systems, including the well-known system of Myers in a manner which would have predictably isolate the heater from the receptacle. Moreover, there is no indication in the instant application that any special steps or devices were devised or that any surprising results were derived from simply using the removable insulator is a silicone pad of Flaherty, Jr with the well-known system of Myers.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 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.
Regarding claim 9, the prior art does not expressly teach wherein the plurality of first air pockets are disposed between the base plate and the receptacle, and the plurality of the second air pockets are disposed between the base plate and the warming plate.
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 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 KEITH BRIAN ASSANTE whose telephone number is (571)272-5853. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 am - 4:30 pm 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, Steven W Crabb can be reached at (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.
/KEITH BRIAN ASSANTE/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/ELIZABETH M KERR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761