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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues that the prior art does not teach and/or suggests the limitations of newly amended independent claim 1.
In response, the Examiner respectfully disagree with the Applicant. The rejection of claim 1 is herein restated with explanatory statements embedded therein:
Claim 1, MacFarlane discloses an apparatus for automated preparation and delivery of a
beverage ordered by a customer, the apparatus comprising: a plurality of cup dispensers (201), wherein at least one of the plurality of cup dispensers is configured to dispense a cup which is appropriate to contain the beverage ordered by the customer (figs.1-2); a first cup-transfer mechanism (231) configured to receive the cup from one of the plurality of cup dispensers (201) and to move the cup along a first axis (para.0325-0328; 231 gets the cup along an axis, inherently) within the apparatus during the preparation of the beverage ordered by the customer; and a second cup-transfer mechanism (232); a pick-up station (209) from which the cup containing the beverage ordered by the customer is
picked up by the customer, wherein the pick-up station (209) is configured to receive the cup containing
the beverage ordered by the customer from the first cup-transfer mechanism (231) and to make room
to receive subsequent cups without requiring human interaction (para.0490).
Although MacFarlane does not disclose a first cup-transfer mechanism (231) configured to move the cup only along a first axis within the apparatus, disabling or removing the additional axis movement of the first cup-transfer mechanism is a variation of the prior art that is predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement.
MacFarlane does not disclose a second cup-transfer mechanism configured to receive the cup
containing the beverage ordered by the customer from the first cup-transfer mechanism after the
beverage has been prepared, wherein the second cup-transfer mechanism is configured to move the
cup only along at least one of a second axis and a third axis within the apparatus, wherein the first axis, the second axis, and the third axis are mutually perpendicular; wherein the pick-up station is configured to receive the cup containing the beverage ordered by the customer from the second cup-transfer
mechanism.
Nakao discloses a second cup-transfer mechanism (32) configured to receive the cup containing
the beverage ordered by the customer from the first cup-transfer mechanism (31; para.0220-0235; see fig.22; first cup-transfer mechanism 31 transfers the cup to relay point P1; relay point P1 is within element 31; second cup-transfer mechanism grips the container from relay point P1 which is within element 31) after the beverage has been prepared, wherein the second cup-transfer mechanism (32) is configured to move the cup only along at least one of a second axis (x-direction; para.0230) and a third axis (z-direction; para.0230) within the apparatus, wherein the first axis (y-direction; para.0227), the second axis, and the third axis are mutually perpendicular. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the device of MacFarlane with a second cup-transfer mechanism configured to receive the cup containing the beverage ordered by the customer from the first cup-transfer mechanism after the beverage has been prepared, wherein the second cup-transfer mechanism is configured to move the cup only along at least one of a second axis and a third axis within the apparatus, wherein the first axis, the second axis, and the third axis are mutually perpendicular; wherein the pick-up station is configured to receive the cup containing the beverage ordered by the customer from the second cup-transfer mechanism because it merely provides another well-known configuration of utilizing dual transfer units which further improves operational efficiency.
Therefore, MacFarlane and Nakao do teach and/or suggest all the limitations of newly amended claim 1 as clearly stated in the rejection. Applicant’s amendment to claim 1 is an obvious variation of the prior art teachings of both MacFarlane and Nakao and one of ordinary skill in the art can easily arrive at such a configuration.
Applicant further argues that one of ordinary skill in the art would not have the motivation to combine the prior art of Nakao with MacFarlane to obtain the apparatus of claim 1.
In response, the Examiner respectfully disagree with the Applicant. The Nakao and MacFarlane prior art both disclose beverage machines that employ robotic arms for the preparation of the beverages and/or dispensing of the beverages to the customer. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have the motivation to combine the Nakao and MacFarlane references to arrive at the limitations recited in claim 1 of the instant application.
Applicant argues that Nakao does not teach a second cup-transfer mechanism configured to receive the cup containing the beverage ordered by the customer from the first cup-transfer mechanism.
In response, the Examiner respectfully disagree with the Applicant. From para.0220-0235 in the Nakao reference, in see fig.22; first cup-transfer mechanism 31 transfers the cup to relay point P1; relay point P1 is within element 31; second cup-transfer mechanism grips the container from relay point P1 which is within element 31, Hence, Nakao clearly teaches a second cup-transfer mechanism configured to receive the cup containing the beverage ordered by the customer from the first cup-transfer mechanism as depicted in fig.22.
Applicant argues that the prior art does not teach and/or suggest the limitations of newly amended independent claim 24.
In response, the Examiner respectfully disagree with the applicant. The rejection of claim 24 is herein restated:
Claim 24, MacFarlane discloses a method for automated preparation and pick-up of a beverage
ordered by a customer, the method comprising: dispensing a cup (201) which is appropriate to contain
the beverage ordered by the customer (figs.1-2); receiving the cup in a first cup-transfer mechanism
(231); moving the cup along a first axis by the first cup-transfer mechanism (231) during preparation of the beverage ordered by the customer (para.0325-0328; 231 gets the cup along an axis, inherently);
placing the cup with the beverage ordered by the customer from the first cup-transfer mechanism
(231) at a pick-up location (209 is a delivery portal/station) from which the cup containing the beverage ordered by the customer is picked up by the customer; and making room at the location (209) to receive subsequent cups without requiring human interaction; a second cup-transfer mechanism (232).
Although MacFarlane does not disclose moving the cup only along a first axis by the first cup-transfer mechanism (231) during preparation of the beverage ordered by the customer, disabling or removing the additional axis movement of the first cup-transfer mechanism is a variation of the prior art that is predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement.
MacFarlane does not disclose transferring the cup containing the beverage ordered by the
customer from the first cup-transfer mechanism to a second cup-transfer mechanism after the
beverage has been prepared, wherein the second cup-transfer mechanism is configured to move the cup only along at least one of a second axis and a third axis, wherein the first axis, the second axis, and the third axis are mutually perpendicular; placing the cup with the beverage ordered by the customer from the second cup-transfer mechanism at a pick-up location from which the cup containing the beverage ordered by the customer is picked up by the customer.
Nakao discloses transferring the cup containing the beverage ordered by the customer from the
first cup-transfer mechanism (31) to a second cup-transfer mechanism (32) after the beverage has been
prepared, wherein the second cup-transfer mechanism (32) is configured to move the cup only along at least one of a second axis (x-direction; para.0230) and a third axis (z-direction; para.0230), wherein the first axis (y- direction; para.0227), the second axis, and the third axis are mutually perpendicular. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the device of MacFarlane with transferring the cup containing the beverage ordered by the customer from the first cup-transfer mechanism to a second cup-transfer mechanism after the beverage has been prepared, wherein the second cup-transfer mechanism is configured to move the cup only along at least one of a second axis and a third axis, wherein the first axis, the second axis, and the third axis are mutually perpendicular; placing the cup with the beverage ordered by the customer from the second cup-transfer mechanism at a pick-up location from which the cup containing the beverage ordered by the customer is picked up by the customer because it merely provides another well-known configuration of utilizing dual transfer units which further improves operational efficiency.
Applicant’s amendment to claim 24 is an obvious variation of the prior art teachings of both MacFarlane and Nakao and one of ordinary skill in the art can easily arrive at such a configuration.
Applicant argues that the prior art does not teach and/or suggest the limitations of newly amended independent claim 41.
In response, the Examiner respectfully disagree with the applicant. The rejection of claim 41 is restated herein:
Claim 41, MacFarlane discloses an apparatus for automated preparation and delivery of a
beverage ordered by a customer, the apparatus comprising: a plurality of cup dispensers (201), wherein
at least one of the plurality of cup dispensers is configured to dispense a cup which is appropriate to
contain the beverage ordered by the customer; a cup-transfer mechanism (231) configured to receive
the cup and to move the cup along mutually perpendicular axes within the apparatus during the preparation of the beverage ordered by the customer.
Although MacFarlane does not disclose configured to receive the cup and to move the cup only along one of three mutually perpendicular axes within the apparatus, disabling or removing the additional axis movement of the first cup-transfer mechanism is a variation of the prior art that is predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement.
MacFarlane does not disclose a laser configured to mark information about the beverage
ordered by the customer directly onto the cup, whereby an operator of the apparatus can charge the
customer based on the information.
Hwang discloses a laser (160) configured to mark information about the beverage ordered by
the customer directly onto the cup (para.0063). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the device of MacFarlane with a laser
configured to mark information about the beverage ordered by the customer directly onto the cup, whereby an operator of the apparatus can charge the customer based on the information simply to have
a robotic arm capable of printing beverage order information on a cup containing beverage which would
further enhance the dispensing efficiency automatically.
Applicant’s amendment to claim 41 is an obvious variation of the prior art teachings of MacFarlane and one of ordinary skill in the art can easily arrive at such a configuration.
Applicant argues that the prior art does not teach and/or suggest the limitations of newly amended independent claim 45.
In response, the Examiner respectfully disagree with the applicant. The rejection of claim 45 is restated herein:
Claim 45, MacFarlane discloses a method for automated preparation and pick-up of a beverage
ordered by a customer (abstract), the method comprising: dispensing a cup which is appropriate to
contain the beverage ordered by the customer; receiving the cup in a cup-transfer mechanism (231); moving the cup along mutually perpendicular axes by the cup-transfer mechanism during preparation of the beverage ordered by the customer.
Although MacFarlane does not disclose moving the cup only along one of three mutually perpendicular axes, disabling or removing the additional axis movement of the first cup-transfer mechanism is a variation of the prior art that is predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement.
MacFarlane does not disclose marking information about the beverage ordered by the customer
directly onto the cup, whereby the customer can be charged based on the information.
Hwang discloses marking information (the marked information contains beverage order information chosen by the consumer) about the beverage ordered by the customer directly onto
the cup (para.0063). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date to provide the device of MacFarlane with marking information about the beverage ordered by the customer directly onto the cup, whereby the customer can be charged based on the information simply to have a robotic arm capable of printing beverage order information on a cup containing beverage which would further enhance the dispensing efficiency automatically.
Applicant’s amendment to claim 45 is an obvious variation of the prior art teachings of MacFarlane and one of ordinary skill in the art can easily arrive at such a configuration.
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.
Claims 1,5,9-12,14-16,20-21,24,28,32,34-35,37-38 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being
unpatentable over MacFarlane et al. (US 2020/0375388) in view of Nakao (US 2022/0262190).
Claim 1, MacFarlane discloses an apparatus for automated preparation and delivery of a
beverage ordered by a customer, the apparatus comprising: a plurality of cup dispensers (201), wherein at least one of the plurality of cup dispensers is configured to dispense a cup which is appropriate to contain the beverage ordered by the customer (figs.1-2); a first cup-transfer mechanism (231) configured to receive the cup from one of the plurality of cup dispensers (201) and to move the cup along a first axis (para.0325-0328; 231 gets the cup along an axis, inherently) within the apparatus during the preparation of the beverage ordered by the customer; and a second cup-transfer mechanism (232); a pick-up station (209) from which the cup containing the beverage ordered by the customer is
picked up by the customer, wherein the pick-up station (209) is configured to receive the cup containing
the beverage ordered by the customer from the first cup-transfer mechanism (231) and to make room
to receive subsequent cups without requiring human interaction (para.0490).
Although MacFarlane does not disclose a first cup-transfer mechanism (231) configured to move the cup only along a first axis within the apparatus, disabling or removing the additional axis movement of the first cup-transfer mechanism is a variation of the prior art that is predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement.
MacFarlane does not disclose a second cup-transfer mechanism configured to receive the cup
containing the beverage ordered by the customer from the first cup-transfer mechanism after the
beverage has been prepared, wherein the second cup-transfer mechanism is configured to move the
cup only along at least one of a second axis and a third axis within the apparatus, wherein the first axis, the second axis, and the third axis are mutually perpendicular; wherein the pick-up station is configured to receive the cup containing the beverage ordered by the customer from the second cup-transfer
mechanism.
Nakao discloses a second cup-transfer mechanism (32) configured to receive the cup containing
the beverage ordered by the customer from the first cup-transfer mechanism (31; para.0220-0235; see fig.22; first cup-transfer mechanism 31 transfers the cup to relay point P1; relay point P1 is within element 31; second cup-transfer mechanism grips the container from relay point P1 which is within element 31) after the beverage has been prepared, wherein the second cup-transfer mechanism (32) is configured to move the cup only along at least one of a second axis (x-direction; para.0230) and a third axis (z-direction; para.0230) within the apparatus, wherein the first axis (y-direction; para.0227), the second axis, and the third axis are mutually perpendicular. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the device of MacFarlane with a second cup-transfer mechanism configured to receive the cup containing the beverage ordered by the customer from the first cup-transfer mechanism after the beverage has been prepared, wherein the second cup-transfer mechanism is configured to move the cup only along at least one of a second axis and a third axis within the apparatus, wherein the first axis, the second axis, and the third axis are mutually perpendicular; wherein the pick-up station is configured to receive the cup containing the beverage ordered by the customer from the second cup-transfer mechanism because it merely provides another well-known configuration of utilizing dual transfer units which further improves operational efficiency.
Claim 5, MacFarlane discloses the one pick-up station (209).
Although MacFarlane does not disclose wherein the apparatus comprises two pick-up stations
which are located at least about 2.5 feet from each other, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary
skill in the art before the effective filing date to implement a plurality of pick-up stations located some
distance from each other since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a
device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. V. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Claim 9, although MacFarlane does not disclose wherein the apparatus comprises a plurality of
first cup-transfer mechanisms (231), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date to implement a plurality of first cup-transfer mechanisms since it has been held
that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St.
Regis Paper Co. V. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Claim 10, although MacFarlane does not disclose wherein the apparatus comprises two first
cup-transfer mechanisms (232), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date to implement two first cup-transfer mechanisms since it has been held that mere
duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis
Paper Co. V. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Claim 11, although MacFarlane does not disclose wherein the apparatus comprises a plurality of
second cup- transfer mechanisms (232), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art
before the effective filing date to implement a plurality of second cup-transfer mechanisms since it has
been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in
the art. St. Regis Paper Co. V. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Claim 12, MacFarlane discloses wherein the apparatus comprises the second cup-transfer
mechanism (232). Although MacFarlane does not disclose wherein comprises two second cup-transfer
mechanisms, each of the two second cup-transfer mechanisms being located at an opposite end of the
first axis of the apparatus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date to implement two second cup-transfer mechanisms, each of the two second cup-
transfer mechanisms being located at an opposite end of the first axis of the apparatus or any other
location within the apparatus since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts
of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. V. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Claim 14, MacFarlane discloses wherein the first cup-transfer mechanism (231) handles cups
having different top diameters (para.0390; cup dispensing tube 1700 can handle a variety of cup
diameters; thus 231 grabs cups of varying diameters).
Although MacFarlane does not disclose wherein the apparatus comprises a plurality of first cup-
transfer mechanisms (231), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date to implement a plurality of first cup- transfer mechanisms since it has been held that
mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis
Paper Co. V. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Claim 15, MacFarlane discloses wherein the bottoms of the cups that extend from each of the
plurality of cup dispensers (201) are in the same horizontal plane (para.0383; figs.17-19).
Claim 16, although MacFarlane does not explicitly wherein the first cup-transfer mechanism
(231) and the second cup- transfer mechanism (232) are located above the cup containing the beverage
ordered by the customer, it would be very obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to position the cup-
transfer mechanism either above or below the cup containing the beverage in order to effectively and
efficiently grasp the cup.
Claim 20, MacFarlane discloses at least one door (4110) granting access to the pick-up station
(209).
Claim 21, MacFarlane discloses wherein access to the pick-up station (209) via the at least one
door (4110) is granted only to the customer.
Claim 24, MacFarlane discloses a method for automated preparation and pick-up of a beverage
ordered by a customer, the method comprising: dispensing a cup (201) which is appropriate to contain
the beverage ordered by the customer (figs.1-2); receiving the cup in a first cup-transfer mechanism
(231); moving the cup along a first axis by the first cup-transfer mechanism (231) during preparation of the beverage ordered by the customer (para.0325-0328; 231 gets the cup along an axis, inherently);
placing the cup with the beverage ordered by the customer from the first cup-transfer mechanism
(231) at a pick-up location (209 is a delivery portal/station) from which the cup containing the beverage ordered by the customer is picked up by the customer; and making room at the location (209) to receive subsequent cups without requiring human interaction; a second cup-transfer mechanism (232).
Although MacFarlane does not disclose moving the cup only along a first axis by the first cup-transfer mechanism (231) during preparation of the beverage ordered by the customer, disabling or removing the additional axis movement of the first cup-transfer mechanism is a variation of the prior art that is predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement.
MacFarlane does not disclose transferring the cup containing the beverage ordered by the
customer from the first cup-transfer mechanism to a second cup-transfer mechanism after the
beverage has been prepared, wherein the second cup-transfer mechanism is configured to move the cup only along at least one of a second axis and a third axis, wherein the first axis, the second axis, and the third axis are mutually perpendicular; placing the cup with the beverage ordered by the customer from the second cup-transfer mechanism at a pick-up location from which the cup containing the beverage ordered by the customer is picked up by the customer.
Nakao discloses transferring the cup containing the beverage ordered by the customer from the
first cup-transfer mechanism (31) to a second cup-transfer mechanism (32) after the beverage has been
prepared, wherein the second cup-transfer mechanism (32) is configured to move the cup only along at least one of a second axis (x-direction; para.0230) and a third axis (z-direction; para.0230), wherein the first axis (y- direction; para.0227), the second axis, and the third axis are mutually perpendicular. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the device of MacFarlane with transferring the cup containing the beverage ordered by the customer from the first cup-transfer mechanism to a second cup-transfer mechanism after the beverage has been prepared, wherein the second cup-transfer mechanism is configured to move the cup only along at least one of a second axis and a third axis, wherein the first axis, the second axis, and the third axis are mutually perpendicular; placing the cup with the beverage ordered by the customer from the second cup-transfer mechanism at a pick-up location from which the cup containing the beverage ordered by the customer is picked up by the customer because it merely provides another well-known configuration of utilizing dual transfer units which further improves operational efficiency.
Claim 28, MacFarlane discloses providing a pick-up (209) from which the cup
containing the beverage ordered by the customer can be picked up by the customer.
Although MacFarlane does not disclose providing a plurality of pick-up locations, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to implement providing a
plurality of locations since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a
device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. V. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Claim 32, MacFarlane discloses the step of handling, by the first cup-transfer mechanism (231),
cups having different top diameters (para.0390; cup dispensing tube 1700 can handle a variety of cup
diameters; thus 231 grabs cups of varying diameters).
Claim 34, although MacFarlane discloses the step of locating the first cup-transfer mechanism
(231) and the second cup-transfer mechanism (232) above the cup containing the beverage ordered by
the customer, it would be very obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to position the cup-transfer
mechanisms either above or below the cup containing the beverage in order to effectively and
efficiently grasp the cup.
Claim 35, MacFarlane discloses further comprising the step of verifying one or more of: the size
of the cup that contains the beverage ordered by the consumer, the level of the beverage contained
within the cup (para.0065; the camera disposed in the system has an image analysis subsystem which
can be programmed to analyze the size of the cup or the level of beverage contained within the cup),
and the approximate temperature of the beverage contained within the cup).
Claim 37, MacFarlane discloses the step of granting access to the pick-up location (209) via at
least one door (4110).
Claim 38, MacFarlane discloses wherein access to the pick-up location (209) via the at least one
door (4110) is granted only to the customer.
Claims 2,6,25,27,29 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MacFarlane et al. (US 2020/0375388) in view of Nakao (US 2022/0262190) in view of Bjornvall et al. (US 2010/0025422).
Claim 2, MacFarlane in view of Nakao do not disclose wherein the pick-up station (209) comprises a conveyor.
Bjornvall discloses wherein the pick-up station (fig.5h; para.0034) comprises a conveyor (fig.5h;
para.0034). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the
device of MacFarlane in view of Nakao with wherein the pick-up station comprises a conveyor because it
illustrates another very well-known dispensing position configuration that has been fed forward an
additional predetermined distance to partly project from the opening and such configuration does not
impart any novelty whatsoever in the claim limitation.
Claim 6, MacFarlane in view of Nakao do not disclose wherein each of the two pick-up stations
comprises a conveyor.
Bjornvall discloses wherein the pick-up station (fig.5h; para.0034) comprises a conveyor (fig.5h;
para.0034). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the
device of MacFarlane in view of Nakao with wherein the pick-up station comprises a conveyor because it
illustrates another very well-known dispensing position configuration that has been fed forward an
additional predetermined distance to partly project from the opening and such configuration does not
impart any novelty whatsoever in the claim limitation.
Although Bjornvall does not disclose wherein each of the two pick-up stations comprises a
conveyor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to
implement wherein each of the two pick-up stations comprises a conveyor since it has been held that
mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis
Paper Co. V. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Claim 25, MacFarlane in view of Nakao discloses wherein the placing step comprises placing the cup containing the beverage ordered by the customer to a pick-up location using the second cup-transfer mechanism (from the rejection of claim 24).
MacFarlane in view of Nakao do not disclose wherein the placing step comprises placing the cup containing the beverage ordered by the customer on a conveyor using the second cup-transfer mechanism.
Bjornvall discloses wherein the placing step comprises placing the container containing the food ordered by the customer on a conveyor (fig.5; para.0034). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the device of MacFarlane in view of Nakao with wherein the placing step comprises placing the cup containing the beverage ordered by the customer on a conveyor using the second cup-transfer mechanism because it illustrates another very well-known dispensing position configuration that has been fed forward an additional predetermined distance to partly project from the opening and such configuration does not impart any novelty whatsoever in the claim limitation.
Claim 27, MacFarlane in view of Nakao does not disclose placing the cup containing the beverage ordered by the customer on the conveyor by moving the cup only along the second axis and/or the third axis.
Bjornvall discloses placing the container containing the food ordered by the customer on the conveyor (fig.5h; para.0034) by moving the container only along the second axis and/or the third axis (fig.5). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the device of MacFarlane in view of Nakao with placing the cup containing the beverage ordered by the customer on the conveyor by moving the cup only along the second axis and/or the third axis because it illustrates another very well-known dispensing position configuration that has been fed forward an additional predetermined distance to partly project from the opening and such configuration does not impart any novelty whatsoever in the claim limitation.
Claim 29, MacFarlane does not disclose wherein each of the plurality of pick-up locations comprises a conveyor.
Although MacFarlane does not disclose providing a plurality of pick-up locations, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to implement providing a
plurality of locations since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a
device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. V. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Bjornvall discloses a pick-up location comprising a conveyor (fig.5h; para.0034). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the device of MacFarlane with a location comprising a conveyor because it illustrates another very well-known dispensing position configuration that has been fed forward an additional predetermined distance to partly project from the opening and such configuration does not impart any novelty whatsoever in the claim limitation.
Claim 17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MacFarlane et al. (US
2020/0375388) in view of Nakao (US 2022/0262190) in view of Rodefeld et al. (US 2014/0107834).
Claim 17, MacFarlane discloses a controller (the system inherently has a controller); and a
camera (para.0065) coupled to the controller to verify one or more of: a size of the cup that contains
the beverage ordered by the customer, a level of the beverage contained within the cup (the camera
disposed in the system has an image analysis subsystem which can be programmed to analyze the size
of the cup or the level of beverage contained within the cup), and an approximate temperature of the
beverage contained within the cup.
MacFarlane in view of Nakao do not disclose an infrared camera.
Rodefeld discloses an infrared camera for image data analysis (para.005-007). Therefore, it
would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the
device of MacFarlane in view of Nakao with an infrared camera because it merely provides another
commonly used tool for image recognition analysis.
Claims 41-47 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MacFarlane et al. (US
2020/0375388) in view of Hwang (US 2021/0331507).
Claim 41, MacFarlane discloses an apparatus for automated preparation and delivery of a
beverage ordered by a customer, the apparatus comprising: a plurality of cup dispensers (201), wherein
at least one of the plurality of cup dispensers is configured to dispense a cup which is appropriate to
contain the beverage ordered by the customer; a cup-transfer mechanism (231) configured to receive
the cup and to move the cup along mutually perpendicular axes within the apparatus during the preparation of the beverage ordered by the customer.
Although MacFarlane does not disclose configured to receive the cup and to move the cup only along one of three mutually perpendicular axes within the apparatus, disabling or removing the additional axis movement of the first cup-transfer mechanism is a variation of the prior art that is predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement.
MacFarlane does not disclose a laser configured to mark information about the beverage
ordered by the customer directly onto the cup, whereby an operator of the apparatus can charge the
customer based on the information.
Hwang discloses a laser (160) configured to mark information about the beverage ordered by
the customer directly onto the cup (para.0063). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the device of MacFarlane with a laser
configured to mark information about the beverage ordered by the customer directly onto the cup, whereby an operator of the apparatus can charge the customer based on the information simply to have
a robotic arm capable of printing beverage order information on a cup containing beverage which would
further enhance the dispensing efficiency automatically.
Claim 42, MacFarlane does not disclose wherein the information identifies specific ingredients
of the beverage ordered by the customer.
Hwang discloses wherein the information identifies beverage order information (para.0063).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
to provide the device of MacFarlane with wherein the information identifies beverage order information
simply to have a robotic arm capable of printing beverage order information on a cup containing
beverage which would further enhance the dispensing efficiency automatically.
Although Hwang does not explicitly disclose wherein the information identifies specific
ingredients of the beverage ordered by the customer, it would have been obvious to implement
information identifying specific ingredients of the beverage ordered by the customer by the laser beam
unit 160 since it merely requires routine skill to implement such a configuration.
Claim 43, MacFarlane does not disclose wherein the information comprises a barcode.
Hwang discloses wherein the information identifies beverage order information (para.0063).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
to provide the device of MacFarlane with wherein the information identifies beverage order information
simply to have a robotic arm capable of printing beverage order information on a cup containing
beverage which would further enhance the dispensing efficiency automatically.
Although Hwang does not explicitly disclose wherein the information comprises a barcode, it
would have been obvious to implement wherein the information comprises a barcode by the laser beam
unit 160 since it merely requires routine skill to implement such a configuration.
Claim 44, MacFarlane does not disclose wherein the information comprises a QR code.
Hwang discloses wherein the information identifies beverage order information (para.0063).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
to provide the device of MacFarlane with wherein the information identifies beverage order information
simply to have a robotic arm capable of printing beverage order information on a cup containing
beverage which would further enhance the dispensing efficiency automatically.
Although Hwang does not explicitly disclose wherein the information comprises a QR code, it
would have been obvious to implement wherein the information comprises a QR code by the laser beam
unit 160 since it merely requires routine skill to implement such a configuration.
Claim 45, MacFarlane discloses a method for automated preparation and pick-up of a beverage
ordered by a customer (abstract), the method comprising: dispensing a cup which is appropriate to
contain the beverage ordered by the customer; receiving the cup in a cup-transfer mechanism (231); moving the cup along mutually perpendicular axes by the cup-transfer mechanism during preparation of the beverage ordered by the customer.
Although MacFarlane does not disclose moving the cup only along one of three mutually perpendicular axes, disabling or removing the additional axis movement of the first cup-transfer mechanism is a variation of the prior art that is predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement.
MacFarlane does not disclose marking information about the beverage ordered by the customer
directly onto the cup, whereby the customer can be charged based on the information.
Hwang discloses marking information (the marked information contains beverage order information chosen by the consumer) about the beverage ordered by the customer directly onto
the cup (para.0063). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date to provide the device of MacFarlane with marking information about the beverage ordered by the customer directly onto the cup, whereby the customer can be charged based on the information simply to have a robotic arm capable of printing beverage order information on a cup containing beverage which would further enhance the dispensing efficiency automatically.
Claim 46, MacFarlane does not disclose wherein the information identifies specific ingredients
of the beverage ordered by the customer.
Hwang discloses wherein the information identifies beverage order information (para.0063).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
to provide the device of MacFarlane with wherein the information identifies beverage order information
simply to have a robotic arm capable of printing beverage order information on a cup containing
beverage which would further enhance the dispensing efficiency automatically.
Although Hwang does not explicitly disclose wherein the information identifies specific
ingredients of the beverage ordered by the customer, it would have been obvious to implement
information identifying specific ingredients of the beverage ordered by the customer by the laser beam
unit 160 since it merely requires routine skill to implement such a configuration.
Claim 47, MacFarlane does not disclose wherein the information comprises a barcode.
Hwang discloses wherein the information identifies beverage order information (para.0063).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
to provide the device of MacFarlane with wherein the information identifies beverage order information
simply to have a robotic arm capable of printing beverage order information on a cup containing
beverage which would further enhance the dispensing efficiency automatically.
Although Hwang does not explicitly disclose wherein the information comprises a barcode, it
would have been obvious to implement wherein the information comprises a barcode by the laser beam
unit 160 since it merely requires routine skill to implement such a configuration.
Claims 48-50 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MacFarlane et al. (US
2020/0375388) in view of Hwang (US 2021/0331507) in view of Patel et al. (US 11,657,667).
Claim 48, MacFarlane in view of Hwang do not disclose scanning the barcode at a point-of-sale
system.
Patel discloses scanning the barcode at a point-of-sale system (C3:L25-65). Therefore, it would
have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the device of MacFarlane in view of
Hwang do not disclose scanning the barcode at a point-of-sale system because it is a very well-known
way of dispensing products using a unique machine identifier.
Claim 49, MacFarlane does not disclose wherein the information comprises a QR code.
Hwang discloses wherein the information identifies beverage order information (para.0063). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
to provide the device of MacFarlane with wherein the information identifies beverage order information
simply to have a robotic arm capable of printing beverage order information on a cup containing
beverage which would further enhance the dispensing efficiency automatically.
Although Hwang does not explicitly disclose wherein the information comprises a QR code, it
would have been obvious to implement wherein the information comprises a QR code by the laser beam
unit 160 since it merely requires routine skill to implement such a configuration.
Claim 50, MacFarlane in view of Hwang do not disclose scanning the QR code at a point-of-sale
system.
Patel discloses scanning the QR code at a point-of-sale system (C3:L25-65). Therefore, it would
have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the device of MacFarlane in view of
Hwang with scanning the QR code at a point-of-sale system because it is a very well-known way of dispensing products using a unique machine identifier.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-4,7-8,13,18-19,22-23,26,30-31,33,36,39-40 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.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 AYODEJI T OJOFEITIMI whose telephone number is (571)272-6557. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 AM - 5:00 PM.
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, GENE CRAWFORD can be reached at (571) 272-6911. 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.
/AYODEJI T OJOFEITIMI/Examiner, Art Unit 3651
/GENE O CRAWFORD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3651