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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 06/09/2026 has been entered.
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.
Claim 9 is 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the adapter bottom … is provided with a plurality of outlets for fluid communication.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear whether “a plurality of outlets” is the same as “a plurality of outlets” as previously recited in claim 1. For purposes of examination, they are taken to be the same.
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 1-4, 7, 11, and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kenril (CN212815905U) with citations made to attached machine translations.
Regarding claim 1, Kenril teaches a beverage maker (10), comprising:
a water source (601);
a filter holder (105); and
a beverage cartridge adapter (401) that includes a beverage cartridge holder (407) positioned between the water source (601) and the filter holder (105), the beverage cartridge holder (105) being configured for fluid communication between the water source (601) and the filter holder (105, Pg. 7 Para. 3 lines 1-11),
wherein the beverage cartridge adapter (401) includes an adapter bottom (406) provided with a plurality of second bottom outlets (410) configured for fluid communication (Pg. 6 Para. 2 lines 5-20 the leaked liquid can flow through the holes into the brew basket 105) between the beverage cartridge holder (407) and the filter holder (105),
wherein, in a plan view of the beverage maker (10), the plurality of second bottom outlets (410) in the adapter bottom (406) are positioned outside the beverage cartridge holder (407, Fig. 4D),
wherein, when a beverage cartridge (604) is held by the beverage cartridge holder (407), beverage exits from the beverage cartridge holder (407) via a first outlet (413, 609) of the beverage cartridge holder (407), and
when a beverage cartridge (604) is not held by the beverage cartridge holder (407), water exits from the beverage cartridge holder (407) via a second outlet (417) of the beverage cartridge holder (407, Fig. 4D where it is understood that when there is no beverage cartridge in 609, water would flow through central opening 407) and via the plurality of second bottom outlets (410) of the adapter bottom (406), the second outlet (417) being different from the first outlet (413, 609).
Regarding claim 2, Kenril teaches the beverage maker of claim 1,
wherein the water source (601) is configured to capture (Pg. 6 Para. 3 lines 12-15 the second end of the first conduit (601) configured to pierce a cartridge (604)) the beverage cartridge (604) that is held by the beverage cartridge holder (407).
Regarding claim 3, Kenril teaches the beverage maker of claim 2,
further comprising a lid (402), the water source (601) being positioned at the lid (402),
wherein the lid (402) includes a recess (411) that at least partly accommodates the beverage cartridge (604) that is held by the beverage cartridge holder (407, Pg. 6 Para. 2 lines 15-20 the lid 402 also has a ridge 411 formed on the lower surface thereof, the ridge 411 being configured to seal the opening of the cartridge receiving cavity 407 when the body 401 is closed by the lid 402, so as to prevent liquid from leaking out of the opening).
Regarding claim 4, Kenril teaches the beverage maker of claim 3,
wherein the beverage cartridge adapter (401) is latched to the lid (Pg. 6 Para. 2 lines 1-7 cover 402 may be attached to body 401, for example by complementary connections 408 on body 401 and cover 402), or wherein the beverage cartridge adapter is latched to the filter holder.
Regarding claim 7, Kenril teaches the beverage maker of claim 1,
wherein the beverage cartridge adapter (401) includes a side guide (Fig. 4A-D walls of 401) that forms the beverage cartridge holder (407, Fig. 4D); and an adapter bottom (406) below the side guide (Fig. 4A-D walls of 401).
Regarding claim 11, Kenril teaches the beverage maker of claim 1,
wherein the filter holder (105) includes a filter holder bottom (Pg. 4 Para. 4 lines 1-7 a brew beverage outlet (303) being provided on a bottom wall of the brew basket (105)) provided with a bottom outlet (303).
Regarding claim 16, Kenril and Kamerback teach the beverage maker of claim 1, and Kenril teaches wherein when the beverage cartridge (604) is not held by the beverage cartridge holder (407), water from the water source (603) via the beverage cartridge holder (604) is poured to a filter held by the filter holder (105), via the plurality of second bottom outlets (410, where it is understood that holes 410 would allow water to be poured to a filter in a filter holder).
Regarding claim 17, Kenril teaches a beverage maker (10), comprising:
a water source (601);
a filter holder (105); and
a beverage cartridge adapter (401) that includes a beverage cartridge holder (407) positioned between the water source (601) and the filter holder (105), the beverage cartridge holder (105) being configured for fluid communication between the water source (601) and the filter holder (105, Pg. 7 Para. 3 lines 1-11),
wherein the beverage cartridge adapter (401) includes an adapter bottom (406) provided with a plurality of second bottom outlets (410) configured for fluid communication (Pg. 6 Para. 2 lines 5-20 the leaked liquid can flow through the holes into the brew basket 105) between the beverage cartridge holder (407) and the filter holder (105),
wherein, in a plan view of the beverage maker (10), the plurality of second bottom outlets (410) in the adapter bottom (406) are positioned outside the beverage cartridge holder (407, Fig. 4D),
wherein the beverage maker (10) is configured to have:
a filter mode in which a beverage cartridge (604) is not held by the beverage cartridge holder (407), water from the water source (603) via the beverage cartridge holder (407) is poured to, via the plurality of second bottom outlets (410) of the adapter bottom (406), a filter held by the filter holder (105, Fig. 4D where it is understood that when there is no beverage cartridge in 609, water would flow through central opening 407),
a cartridge mode in which water from the water source (603) is poured to a beverage cartridge (604) held by the beverage cartridge holder (407).
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 5 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kenril (CN212815905U) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Psarologos (US 20180220832).
Regarding claim 5, Kenril teaches the beverage maker of claim 4, further comprising:
one or more latches (408) configured to latch the beverage cartridge adapter (401) to the lid (402), or to latch the beverage cartridge adapter to the filter holder.
Kenril is silent on one or more buttons that disengage the one or more.
Psarologos teaches one or more buttons that disengage the one or more latches ([0061] the handle incorporates, near the lid, a mechanical push button actuator 117 that deactivates the lock or latch that retains the lid in the closed position but that allows the lid to open when the button 117 is depressed).
Kenril and Psarologos are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of beverage makers. It would have been obvious to have modified Kenril to incorporate the teachings of Psarologos to have a bottom to disengage the latches in order to be able to allow the lid to be latched or opened depending on the desired position of the lid (Psarologos [0061]).
Regarding claim 12, Kenril teaches the beverage maker of claim 11,
further comprising a filter support (302) configured to support a filter (Pg. 4 Para. 5 lines 1-7 the filtering device 109, such as a reusable filter screen or filter paper),
wherein the filter support (302) is positioned between the filter holder (105) and the beverage cartridge holder (407).
Kenril is silent on a filter basket.
Psarologos teaches a filter basket (111).
It would have been obvious to modify the filter support of Kenril to be a filter basket as taught in Psarologos in order to allow the filter support to be removeable so the appropriate shaped filter support may be placed to support the desired filter that is in accordance with the desired coffee dose or style to be dispensed (Psarologos [0074]).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kenril (CN212815905U) as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Hansen (US10925433B2).
Regarding claim 6, Kenril teaches the beverage maker of claim 4,
further comprising a housing body (111,113).
Kenril is silent on wherein the lid and the beverage cartridge adapter are configured to be rotated with respect to the housing body
Hansen teaches wherein the lid (44) and the beverage cartridge adapter (45) are configured to be rotated with respect to the housing body (11, Col. 9 lines 10-25 a rotatable upper part 44 and a pivotable cartridge mount 45).
Kenril and Hansen are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of beverage makers. It would have been obvious to have modified Kenril to incorporate the teachings of Hansen to have the lid and beverage cartridge adapter to be rotated with respect to the housing body so that the beverage device may be place in an open or closed position that it is vertical or horizontal, respectively, for operation of the device (Hansen Col. 9 lines 10-25).
Claim 8 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kenril (CN212815905U) as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Johann (DE102006005780A1).
Regarding claim 8, Kenril teaches the beverage maker of claim 7,
wherein the side guide (Fig. 4A-4D peripheral wall of the body 401) extends upward from the adapter bottom (406).
Kenril is silent on the side guide being provided with one or more side outlets, wherein one of the one or more side outlets is the second outlet.
PNG
media_image1.png
1020
750
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 2 of Johann
Johann teaches the side guide (Fig. 2) being provided with one or more side outlets (12), wherein one of the one or more side outlets is the second outlet (12, side outlet 12 discharging liquid).
Kenril and Johann are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of beverage makers. It would have been obvious to have modified Kenril to incorporate the teachings of Johann to have the side guide have an outlet and modify the second outlet as taught in Kenril to be an outlet of the side guide in order to be able to move liquids to a lateral position, rather than a downward position for dispensing (Johann [0037]).
Regarding claim 13, Kenril and Johann teach the beverage maker of claim 8, and Kenril teaches wherein when the beverage cartridge (604) is not held by the beverage cartridge holder (407), water from the water source (603) via the beverage cartridge holder (604) is poured to a filter held by the filter holder (105), via the one or more outlets (417).
Kenril is silent on one or more side outlets.
Johan teaches one or more side outlets (12, Fig. 2)
It would have been obvious to have modified Kenril to incorporate the teachings of Johann to and modify the second outlet as taught in Kenril to be a side outlet in order to be able to move liquids to a lateral position, rather than a downward position for dispensing (Johann [0037]).
Regarding claim 14, Kenril and Johann teach the beverage maker of claim 8, but Kenril is silent on wherein one of the one or more side outlet is formed at a position at which the side guide meets a bottom of the beverage cartridge holder.
Johann teaches wherein one of the one or more side outlet (12, Fig. 2) is formed at a position at which the side guide (Fig. 2) meets a bottom of the beverage cartridge holder (Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to have modified Kenril to incorporate the teachings of Johann to and modify the second outlet as taught in Kenril to be a side outlet at the position where the side guide meets the bottom of the beverage cartridge holder in order to be able to move liquids to a lateral position, rather than a downward position for dispensing (Johann [0037]).
Claims 9-10 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kenril (CN212815905U) as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Kamerback (US11058249B2).
Regarding claim 9, Kenril teaches the beverage maker of claim 7, wherein the adapter bottom (406) provided with a plurality of outlets (410) for fluid communication between the beverage cartridge holder (407) and the filter holder (105).
Kenril is silent on wherein the adapter bottom forms a showerhead style fluid dispenser that is provided with a plurality of outlets.
Kamerback teaches wherein the adapter bottom (3b) forms a showerhead style fluid dispenser that is provided with a plurality of outlets (26, where the plurality of outlets is understood to be "showerhead style").
It would have been obvious to have modified the adapter bottom as taught by Kenril to have a showerhead style fluid dispenser with a plurality of outlets as taught by Kamerback in order to more accurately guide the prepared beverage from the capsule towards the outlet of the system (Kamerback Col. 2 lines 20-25).
Regarding claim 10, Kenril and Kamerback teach the beverage maker of claim 9, but Kenril is silent on wherein the adapter bottom includes a first bottom portion and a second bottom portion that is surrounded by the first bottom portion in the plan view, wherein the plurality of outlets include a plurality of first bottom outlets in the first bottom portion, and a plurality of second bottom outlets in the second bottom portion.
PNG
media_image2.png
690
484
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1 of Kamerback
Kamerback teaches wherein the adapter bottom (3b) includes a first bottom portion and a second bottom portion that is surrounded by the first bottom portion in the plan view (Annotated Fig. 1),
wherein the plurality of outlets (26) include a plurality of first bottom outlets in the first bottom portion (Annotated Fig. 1), and a plurality of second bottom outlets in the second bottom portion (Annotated Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to have modified Kenril to incorporate the teachings of Kamerback to have a first and second portion of the adapter bottoms with a plurality of outlets in order to more accurately guide the prepared beverage from the capsule towards the outlet of the system (Kamerback Col. 2 lines 20-25).
Regarding claim 15, Kenril and Kamerback teach the beverage maker of claim 9, and Kenril teaches wherein when the beverage cartridge (604) is not held by the beverage cartridge holder (407), water from the water source (603) via the beverage cartridge holder (604) is poured to a filter held by the filter holder (105), via the bottom outlet (417).
Kenril is silent wherein the adapter bottom includes a first bottom portion and a second bottom portion that is surrounded by the first bottom portion in the plan view, wherein the plurality of outlets include a plurality of first bottom outlets in the first bottom portion, and a plurality of second bottom outlets in the second bottom portion, the plurality of second bottom outlets.
Kamerback teaches wherein the adapter bottom (3b) includes a first bottom portion and a second bottom portion that is surrounded by the first bottom portion in the plan view (Annotated Fig. 1),
wherein the plurality of outlets (26) include a plurality of first bottom outlets in the first bottom portion (Annotated Fig. 1), and a plurality of second bottom outlets in the second bottom portion (Annotated Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to have modified Kenril to incorporate the teachings of Kamerback to have a first and second portion of the adapter bottoms with a plurality of outlets, and to modify the outlet of Kenril to be the plurality of second bottom outlets in order to more accurately guide the prepared beverage from the capsule towards the outlet of the system (Kamerback Col. 2 lines 20-25).
Response to Arguments
Regarding the applicant’s arguments towards the claim objection to the term “plan view,” the objection is withdrawn, as “plan view” is now understood to mean “the appearance of an object as seen from above,” as applicant argued.
Regarding the applicant’s arguments towards the 35 U.S.C. 112 rejections to claims 1-15, the rejections are withdrawn in view of the amendments filed 6/9/2026.
Applicant's arguments filed 06/09/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding applicant’s argument that previously cited secondary reference Kamerback and the other cited references do not teach the newly amended limitations of claims 1 and 17, the amended limitations are now found to be taught in previously cited reference Kenril, where the limitations regarding the plurality of second bottom outlets are found to be elements 410 of Kenril.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABIGAIL RHUE whose telephone number is (571)272-4615. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10-6.
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 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.
/ABIGAIL H RHUE/Examiner, Art Unit 3761 7/1/2026
Prosecution Insights