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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because:
In Fig. 1, 2 and 3, reference number 34 indicates the coffee pot, while 34 is also indicating the pump in Fig. 3.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because:
In Paragraph 30, reference number 34 indicates both the coffee pot and the pump.
In Paragraph 31, reference number 34 indicates the pump.
In Paragraph 42, reference number 31 indicates both the piping and the pump.
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.
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: an illuminating uni in claims 1, 9 and 16.The specification provides the structure for this limitation in paragraph 0039, explaining that “ an illumination unit” is a light bulb, LED or the like.
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
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.
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 1-3, 8-10 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Romandy et al. (US 20200129001) hereinafter Romandy, and further in view of Eyrignoux (US 20160106254).
Regarding Claim 1, Romandy discloses:
A beverage maker (10, coffee maker; Fig. 2), comprising:
a housing (12, base; Fig. 2) having a platform (14, platform; Fig. 2), a tower (18, arm; Fig. 2) mounted to and extending upwardly from the platform (Paragraph 22 teaches, “A vertical arm 18 rises from the platform.”), and a basket holder (30, brew basket assembly; Fig. 2) fixed to and extending generally horizontally from the tower and over the platform (Abstract teaches a head extends generally horizontally from an upper end of the arm, and a brew basket assembly is pivotally attached to the head, which the examiner interprets that once the brew basket assembly is closed to the head, it is securely placed in the closed position and thus fixed);
a brew basket (38, brew basket; Fig. 2) positioned in the basket holder (Fig. 2);
a fluid reservoir (21, water reservoir; Fig. 2) mounted to the housing (12) (Paragraph 23 teaches the water reservoir occupies space within the arm 18 and the head 20, and Fig. 1 shows the water reservoir is placed on the base);
a heating unit (23, heating element; Fig. 6);
a fluid outlet (29, drip shower; Paragraph 23 and Annotated Fig. 8) positioned over the brew basket (Paragraph 23 teaches that the drip shower 29 is located above the brew basket assembly including the brew basket);
piping (26, tubes or conduits; Fig. 8) fluidly connecting the fluid reservoir (21) with the fluid outlet (29) (Annotated Fig. 8 shows the fluidal connection between the reservoir and the drip shower), the piping routed adjacent the heating unit (23) to permit the heating unit to heat fluid in piping as it travels from the fluid reservoir to the fluid outlet (Fig. 6);
PNG
media_image1.png
640
852
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 2 of Romandy, annotated
PNG
media_image2.png
417
861
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. 6 of Romandy, annotated
PNG
media_image3.png
544
654
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Fig. 8 of Romandy, annotated
Regarding Claim 1, Romandy does not explicitly disclose:
a brew filter positioned in the brew basket, the brew filter being formed of a permeable material;
wherein the brew filter includes a first transparent window and the brew basket includes a second transparent window;
wherein an illuminating unit is positioned in the basket holder; and
wherein the first and second transparent windows are positioned so that light from the illuminating unit passes through the first and second windows.
However, Eyrignoux (US 20160106254) teaches
a brew filter (8, flexible removable filter holder; Fig. 1) (Paragraph 79 and Fig. 7 teaches, provided with a filtering mesh 34, the filter holder 8 is a permanent filter) positioned in the brew basket (1, rigid filter holder; Fig.1) (Fig. 1 teaches the flexible filter holder sits inside the rigid filter holder, which the examiner interprets as the brew basket), the brew filter (8) being formed of a permeable material (Paragraph 67 teaches a flexible removable filter holder 8 consists of a support framework and of metal or plastic mesh, which is a permeable material);
wherein the brew filter (8) includes a first transparent window (9, second open window; Fig. 1) and the brew basket (1) includes a second transparent window (6, transparent window; Fig. 1);
wherein an illuminating unit (13, light source; Fig. 1) is positioned in the basket holder (Fig. 1 teaches the light unit 12 including the light source is adjacent to the rigid filter holder, and Paragraph 68 also teaches the light unit is added or properly configured with the body of the coffee maker. Therefore, in combination with the Romandy, the illumination unit 13 attached to brew basket 1 of Eyrignoux will be in the basket holder 30 of Romandy, since the brew basket 38 of Romandy is in the basket assembly 30 of Romandy); and
wherein the first and second transparent windows are positioned so that light from the illuminating unit passes through the first and second windows (Paragraph 66 teaches a transparent gap 6 is furnished for the passage of light beams from the light source 13. Paragraph 67 teaches the gap 9 is cut on one part, of a size that is at least identical to that of the transparent gap 6. Paragraph 70 teaches the light beams pass through the liquid-tight and transparent window 6, and then through the second open window 9).
Romandy and Eyrignoux are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same field of brewing machines. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the components in the basket holder taught by Romandy to incorporate the means taught by Eyrignoux, in order to provide consumers with a device for dosing and measuring of coffee powder (Paragraph 2; Eyrignoux).
PNG
media_image4.png
730
1110
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1, 2 & 7 of Eyrignoux, annotated
Regarding Claim 2, which is a dependent claim of Claim 1, Romandy in view of Eyrignoux discloses one of the first (6, transparent window; Fig. 1; Eyrignoux) and second windows (9, second open window; Fig. 1; Eyrignoux) includes markings (15, perforations of the graduations; Fig. 2; Eyrignoux) corresponding to a level of material contained in the brew filter (8, flexible removable filter holder; Fig. 1; Eyrignoux) (Eyrignoux in Paragraph 70 teaches the coffee powder is poured directly from the package of ground coffee into the filter up to the level corresponding to the desired number of cups).
Therefore, Claim 2 is obvious over Romandy in combination with Eyrignoux in order to provide consumers with a device for dosing and measuring of coffee powder by simply reading projected markings.
Regarding Claim 3, which is a dependent claim of Claim 2, Romandy in view of Eyrignoux discloses the markings (15) comprise graduated numbered lines (16, numerals; Fig. 2 teaches each marking is associated with numbers).
Therefore, Claims 3 is obvious over Romandy in combination with Eyrignoux in order to provide consumers with a device for dosing and measuring of coffee powder by simply reading projected graduations.
Regarding Claim 8, which is a dependent claim of Claim 1, Romandy in view of Eyrignoux discloses the illuminating unit (13, light source; Fig. 1) is a light emitting diode (LED) (Paragraph 36 teaches LED (Light Emitting Diodes) can be used without restriction as one of the light source types).
Therefore, Claim 8 is obvious over Romandy in combination with Eyrignoux.
Regarding Claim 9, Romandy discloses a beverage maker (10, coffee maker; Fig. 2), comprising:
a housing (12, base; Fig. 2) having a platform (14, platform; Fig. 2), a tower (18, arm; Fig. 2) mounted to and extending upwardly from the platform (Paragraph 22 teaches, “A vertical arm 18 rises from the platform.”), and a basket holder (30, brew basket assembly; Fig. 2) fixed to and extending generally horizontally from the tower and over the platform (Abstract teaches a head extends generally horizontally from an upper end of the arm, and a brew basket assembly is pivotally attached to the head, which the examiner interprets that once the brew basket assembly is closed to the head, it is securely placed in the closed position and thus fixed);
a fluid reservoir (21, water reservoir; Fig. 2) mounted to the housing (12) (Paragraph 23 teaches the water reservoir occupies space within the arm 18 and the head 20, and Fig. 1 shows the water reservoir is placed on the base);
a heating unit (23, heating element; Fig. 6);
a fluid outlet (29, drip shower; Paragraph 23 and Annotated Fig. 8) positioned over the basket holder (Paragraph 23 teaches that the drip shower 29 is located above the brew basket assembly);
piping (26, tubes or conduits; Fig. 8) fluidly connecting the fluid reservoir (21) with the fluid outlet (29) (Annotated Fig. 8 shows the fluidal connection between the reservoir and the drip shower), the piping routed adjacent the heating unit (23) to permit the heating unit to heat fluid in piping as it travels from the fluid reservoir to the fluid outlet (Fig. 6);
Regarding Claim 9, while teaching a brew filter positioned in the basket holder (30, brew basket assembly; Fig. 2) (Paragraph 4 teaches loading of the brew basket with a filter, and Fig. 2 shows the brew basket is positioned in the brew basket assembly), Romandy does not explicitly disclose:
a brew filter positioned in the basket holder, the brew filter being formed of a permeable material;
wherein the brew filter includes a transparent window, the window including markings corresponding to a level of material contained in the brew filter;
wherein an illuminating unit is positioned in the basket holder;
wherein the transparent window is positioned so that light from the illuminating unit passes therethrough.
However, Eyrignoux (US 20160106254) teaches
a brew filter positioned in the basket holder, the brew filter (8, flexible removable filter holder; Fig. 1) being formed of a permeable material (Paragraph 67 teaches a flexible removable filter holder 8 consists of a support framework and of metal or plastic mesh, which is a permeable material);
wherein the brew filter (8) includes a transparent window (9, second open window; Fig. 1), the window (9) including markings (15, perforations of the graduations; Fig. 2) corresponding to a level of material contained in the brew filter (8) (Eyrignoux in Paragraph 70 teaches the coffee powder is poured directly from the package of ground coffee into the filter up to the level corresponding to the desired number of cups);
wherein an illuminating unit (13, light source; Fig. 1) is positioned in the basket holder (Fig. 1 basket holder (1, 12), and therefore illuminating unit 13 is positioned in the basket holder 1, 12, fig. 1)); and
wherein the transparent window (9) is positioned so that light from the illuminating unit passes therethrough (Paragraph 70 teaches the light beams pass through the second open window).
Romandy and Eyrignoux are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same field of brewing machines. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the components in the basket holder taught by Romandy to incorporate the means taught by Eyrignoux, in order to provide consumers with a device for dosing and measuring of coffee powder by simply reading projected markings (Paragraph 2; Eyrignoux).
Regarding Claims 10, which is a dependent claim of Claim 9, Romandy in view of Eyrignoux discloses the markings (15) comprise graduated numbered lines (16, numerals; Fig. 2 teaches each marking is associated with numbers).
Romandy and Eyrignoux are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same field of brewing machines. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the components in the basket holder taught by Romandy to incorporate the means taught by Eyrignoux, in order to provide consumers with a device for dosing and measuring of coffee powder by simply reading projected graduations (Paragraph 2; Eyrignoux).
Regarding Claim 15, which is a dependent claim of Claim 9, Romandy in view of Eyrignoux discloses the illuminating unit (13, light source; Fig. 1; Eyrignoux) is a light emitting diode (LED) (In paragraph 36, Eyrignoux teaches LED (Light Emitting Diodes) can be used without restriction as one of the light source types).
Romandy and Eyrignoux are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same field of brewing machines. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to implement the light source of Eyrignoux as an LED because it would have been a substitution of one known functionally equivalent light source for another, in order to be consistent with the electrical standards applicable to coffee makers (Paragraph 36; Eyrignoux), as well as to achieve predictable benefits including low power consumption, compact size, and reduced heat generation that are desirable in the confined environment of a basket holder.
Claims 6, 13, 16 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Romandy et al. (US 20200129001) hereinafter Romandy, in view of Eyrignoux (US 20160106254), further in review of Schroeder (US 11122203).
Regarding Claim 6 and 13 that are dependent claims of Claim 1 and 9 respectively, Romandy in view of Eyrignoux does not explicitly disclose a controller, and wherein the illuminating unit is operatively connected to the controller.
However, Schroeder teaches a controller (150, controller, Fig. 3), and wherein the illuminating unit is operatively connected to the controller (Fig. 3 teaches the detection assembly 186 is operatively coupled to the controller 150, and includes a door switch to control activation of a light).
Romandy, Eyrignoux and Schroeder are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same field of household kitchen appliances. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the illumination system taught by Eyrignoux to incorporate the control system of Schroeder, in order to provide consumers with more convenient controllability in activating the light.
PNG
media_image5.png
495
761
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Fig. 3 of Schroeder, annotated
Regarding Claim 16, Romandy teaches A beverage maker (10, coffee maker; Fig. 2), comprising:
a housing (12, base; Fig. 2) having a platform (14, platform; Fig. 2), a tower (18, arm; Fig. 2) mounted to and extending upwardly from the platform (Paragraph 22 teaches, “A vertical arm 18 rises from the platform.”), and a basket holder (30, brew basket assembly; Fig. 2) fixed to and extending generally horizontally from the tower and over the platform (Abstract teaches a head extends generally horizontally from an upper end of the arm, and a brew basket assembly is pivotally attached to the head, which the examiner interprets that once the brew basket assembly is closed to the head, it is securely placed in the closed position and thus fixed);
a fluid reservoir (21, water reservoir; Fig. 2) mounted to the housing (12) (Paragraph 23 teaches the water reservoir occupies space within the arm 18 and the head 20, and Fig. 1 shows the water reservoir is placed on the base);
a heating unit (23, heating element; Fig. 6);
a fluid outlet (29, drip shower; Paragraph 23 and Annotated Fig. 8) positioned over the basket holder (Paragraph 23 teaches that the drip shower 29 is located above the brew basket assembly);
piping (26, tubes or conduits; Fig. 8) fluidly connecting the fluid reservoir (21) with the fluid outlet (29) (Annotated Fig. 8 shows the fluidal connection between the reservoir and the drip shower), the piping routed adjacent the heating unit (23) to permit the heating unit to heat fluid in piping as it travels from the fluid reservoir to the fluid outlet (Fig. 6);
Regarding Claim 16, while teaching a brew filter positioned in the basket holder (30, brew basket assembly; Fig. 2) (Paragraph 4 teaches loading of the brew basket with a filter, and Fig. 2 shows the brew basket is positioned in the brew basket assembly), Romandy does not explicitly disclose:
a brew filter positioned in the basket holder, the brew filter being formed of a permeable material;
wherein the brew filter includes a transparent window;
wherein an illuminating unit is positioned in the basket holder;
wherein the transparent window is positioned so that light from the illuminating unit passes therethrough; and
However, Eyrignoux (US 20160106254) teaches
a brew filter positioned in the basket holder, the brew filter (8, flexible removable filter holder; Fig. 1) being formed of a permeable material (Paragraph 67 teaches a flexible removable filter holder 8 consists of a support framework and of metal or plastic mesh, which is a permeable material);
wherein the brew filter (8) includes a transparent window (9, second open window; Fig. 1);
wherein an illuminating unit (13, light source; Fig. 1) is positioned in the basket holder (1, 12 Fig. 1 1, 12, and therefore illuminating unit is positioned in the basket holder 1, 12, fig. 1);
wherein the transparent window (9) is positioned so that light from the illuminating unit passes therethrough (Paragraph 70 teaches the light beams pass through the second open window); and
Romandy and Eyrignoux are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same field of brewing machines. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the components in the basket holder taught by Romandy to incorporate the means taught by Eyrignoux, in order to provide consumers with a device for dosing and measuring of coffee powder (Paragraph 2; Eyrignoux).
Also, regarding Claim 16, Romandy in view of Eyrignoux does not explicitly disclose a controller operatively connected with the illuminating unit, and wherein the controller activates the illuminating unit based on an action taken by a user of the beverage maker.
However, Schroeder teaches a controller (150, controller, Fig. 3) operatively connected with the illuminating unit (Fig. 3 teaches the detection assembly 186 is operatively coupled to the controller 150, and includes a door switch to control activation of a light), and wherein the controller activates the illuminating unit based on an action taken by a user of the beverage maker. (Paragraph 31 teaches the detection assembly 186, which is operatively coupled to the controller 150 shown in Fig. 3, may include a door switch selectively engaged with a refrigerator door to detect if/when the door is in an open position. Such switches are generally understood and may simultaneously control activation of a light for illuminating the fresh food chamber. The examiner interprets opening the refrigerator door as an action taken by a user).
Romandy, Eyrignoux and Schroeder are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same field of household kitchen appliances. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the illumination system taught by Eyrignoux to incorporate the control system of Schroeder, in order to provide consumers with more convenient means to activate the light.
Regarding Claim 18, which is a dependent claim of Claim 16, Romandy in view of Eyrignoux discloses the beverage maker defined in Claim 16, wherein the window (9, second open window; Fig. 1; Eyrignoux) includes markings (15, perforations of the graduations; Fig. 2; Eyrignoux) corresponding to a level of material contained in the brew filter (8, flexible removable filter holder; Fig. 1; Eyrignoux) (Eyrignoux in Paragraph 70 teaches the coffee powder is poured directly from the package of ground coffee into the filter up to the level corresponding to the desired number of cups).
Therefore, Claim 18 is obvious over Romandy in combination with Eyrignoux in order to provide consumers with a device for dosing and measuring of coffee powder by simply reading projected markings (Paragraph 2; Eyrignoux).
Regarding Claim 19, which is a dependent claim of Claim 18, Romandy in view of Eyrignoux discloses the markings (15) comprise graduated numbered lines (16, numerals; Fig. 2 teaches each marking is associated with numbers).
Therefore, Claim 19 is obvious over Romandy in combination with Eyrignoux in order to provide consumers with a device for dosing and measuring of coffee powder by simply reading projected graduations (Paragraph 2; Eyrignoux).
Claims 4-5 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Romandy et al. (US 20200129001) hereinafter Romandy, in view of Eyrignoux (US 20160106254), and further in view of Hanes et al. (US 9585513) hereinafter Hanes.
Regarding Claims 4 and 11 that are dependent claims of Claim 1 and Claim 9 respectively, Romandy in view of Eyrignoux does not explicitly teaches a lid that covers the basket holder, wherein when the lid is moved to an open position that permits a user access to the brew filter.
However, Hanes discloses a lid (16, cover; Fig. 3A) that covers the basket holder, wherein when the lid (16) is moved to an open position that permits a user access to the brew filter (Paragraph 22 teaches a cover is hingedly attached to an upper end of the body, and movable to an open position as shown in Fig. 3A so as to allow access to the interior of the body).
Romandy, Eyrignoux and Hanes are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of brewing machines. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the cover of Hanes into the coffee maker taught by Romandy and Eyrignoux, which would have been a well-known design choice for coffee makers, in order to provide consumers with ease of access that is the predictable and widely recognized benefit.
PNG
media_image6.png
276
615
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Fig. 3A of Hanes, annotated
Regarding Claims 5 and 12 that are dependent claims of Claim 4 and 11 respectively, Romandy in view of Eyrignoux teaches the fluid outlet (29, drip shower; Annotated Fig. 8; Romandy) is located on a shower arm (shower arm section; Annotated Fig. 8; Romandy).
Romandy and Eyrignoux does not explicitly teaches the shower arm is positioned at least partially within the lid.
However, Hanes discloses the shower arm (discharge arm; Annotated Fig. 7) is positioned at least partially within the lid (16, cover; Fig. 3A) (Annotated Fig. 7 teaches the discharge arm is positioned under the cover).
Romandy, Eyrignoux and Hanes are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of brewing machines. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the shower arm section taught by Romandy and Eyrignoux with the discharge arm of Hanes, in order to achieve the well-known goals of improved spatial efficiency, water distribution, as well as coordinated operation with the lid.
PNG
media_image7.png
415
733
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Fig. 7 of Hanes, annotated
Claims 7, 14, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Romandy et al. (US 20200129001) hereinafter Romandy, in view of Eyrignoux (US 20160106254) and Hanes et al. (US 9585513) hereinafter Hanes, and further in view of Schroeder (US 11122203).
Regarding Claims 7, 14 and 17 that are dependent claims of Claim 6, 13 and 16 respectively, Romandy in combination with Eyrignoux and Hanes teaches a lid (16, cover; Fig. 3A; Hanes) that covers the basket holder (30, brew basket assembly; Fig. 2; Romandy).
Romandy, Eyrignoux and Hanes does not teach the controller is configured to activate the illuminating unit when the lid is moved to an open position that permits a user access to the brew filter.
However, Schroeder discloses the controller (150, controller; Fig. 3) is configured to activate the illuminating unit when the lid is moved to an open position that permits a user access to the brew filter (Paragraph 31 teaches the detection assembly 186, which is operatively coupled to the controller 150 shown in Fig. 3, may include a door switch selectively engaged with a refrigerator door to detect if/when the door is in an open position. Such switches are generally understood and may simultaneously control activation of a light for illuminating the fresh food chamber).
Romandy, Eyrignoux, Hanes and Schroeder are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same field of household kitchen appliances. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the illumination system taught by Romandy in combination with Eyrignoux and Hanes to incorporate the control system of Schroeder, in order to provide consumers with improved visibility while accessing the inside of the filter.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JE HWAN JOHN PARK whose telephone number is (571)272-6405. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM.
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, Helena Kosanovic can be reached at 571-272-9059. 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.
/J.J.P./Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/HELENA KOSANOVIC/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761