Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/150,335

SINGLE SERVE COFFEE MAKER

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jan 05, 2023
Examiner
ALEXANDER, REGINALD
Art Unit
3761
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Nomi Brew, Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
1532 granted / 2021 resolved
+5.8% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+18.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
2043
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
43.0%
+3.0% vs TC avg
§102
30.2%
-9.8% vs TC avg
§112
19.2%
-20.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 2021 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-10 and 18-20 in the reply filed on 04 August 2025 is acknowledged. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claim(s) 1, 2, 6, 7, 9, 10, 18 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Diester et al. in view of Tacklind et al. There is disclosed in Diester a single serve coffee brewer comprising: a user input device 23 configured to receive, from a user: an indication of a grind size (para.0041), an indication of a brewing temperature (para. 0041), an indication of a brewing duration (para. 0041), and an indication of a brew size (water volume, para. 0041); a grinding mechanism 8 configured to grind a single serving of whole coffee beans; a brew chamber 6, including a filter divider for retaining the ground coffee beans (para. 0035); a water reservoir 14; a heater 13 configured to heat water from the reservoir; a water pump 15 configured to pump water from the water reservoir to the heater, and pump a measured amount of heated water from the heater to the brew chamber; and a release valve 18 associated with an outlet of the brew chamber. Tacklind discloses, in a coffee brewer, a brew chamber 67 comprising: a first conical section configured to receive and retain ground coffee beans; a filter divider 67 for retaining the ground coffee beans in the first conical section; and a second (lower) annular section surrounding the first section and being prevented from receiving the ground coffee beans by the filter divider; and a release valve 15 configured to retain water in the brew chamber for a set duration to brew coffee using the ground coffee beans and heated water, the set duration being selected (via controller 16) based upon brew information, and responsive to the set duration elapsing to release the brewed coffee from the brewing chamber. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to substitute the brewing chamber and filter arrangement of Diester with the brewing chamber and filter arrangement of Tacklind, in order to allow preparation of the beverage in a pressure free (drip) arrangement. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to substitute the release valve and valve control arrangement of Diester with the release valve and valve control arrangement disclosed in Tacklind, in order to allow the setting of various stepping times for the beverage within the brewing chamber. In regards to claim 9, the claimed water temperature is seen as the standard temperature for the preparation of hot coffee. In regards to claim 10, the disclosed plastic material for the Diester or Tacklind brewing chambers will have some degree of thermal insulation. Applicant’s claim provides no specific construction material. Claim(s) 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Diester et al. in view of Tacklind et al. as applied to claims above, and further in view of Lee et al. Lee discloses, in a coffee brewer, the use of a conical burr grinder 200 (para. 0055). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to substitute the grinder of Diester, as modified by Tacklind, with the conical burr grinder disclosed in Lee, in order to provide a more efficient means of grinding the coffee beans. Claim(s) 8 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Diester et al. in view of Tacklind et al. as applied to claims above, and further in view of Lai et al. Lai discloses, in a coffee brewer, the use of a filtering divider (capsule) 10 which serves as a package for retaining whole coffee beans prior to grinding. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to substitute the filter arrangement of Diester, as modified by Tacklind, with the capsule disclosed in Lai, in order to provide a self-contained arrangement for the storage of ground coffee beans. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art references to Krinitchko, Yang, Hamad et al., Long, Sr. et al. and Anthony et al. are cited for their disclosure of the state of the art. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to REGINALD L. ALEXANDER whose telephone number is (571)272-1395. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 5:30-2:00. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ibrahime Abraham can be reached at 571-270-5569. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /REGINALD ALEXANDER/ Examiner Art Unit 3761
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 05, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 29, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599265
BEVERAGE MACHINE WITH SEPARABLE FLUID MODULE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12590708
DOUGH PREPARATION APPARATUS AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582259
METHOD OF MAKING INFANT FORMULA AND RELATED DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575694
COFFEE MACHINE WITH DYNAMIC FLOW AND TEMPERATURE CONTROL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12575693
SMART BEVERAGE SYSTEM, APPARATUS, AND METHOD OF USING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
76%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+18.4%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 2021 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month