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 .
The status of the 12/17/2025 claims, is as follows: Claims 1, 10-11, and 15 have been amended; Claims 6-9, 16-20, and 22-24 have been canceled; and claims 1-5, 10-15, and 21 are pending.
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.
Claims 1-5, and 10 are 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
In claim 1:
The limitation "a single first valve" in line 15 renders the claim indefinite because there is a previous instance of “a first valve” recited in line 7 of claim 1. It is unclear if the “a single first valve” in line 15 is intended to refer to the “first valve” in line 7 of claim 1.
For the purpose of substantive examination, it is presumed that the “a single first valve” in line 15 has antecedent basis in line 7 of claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-2, 5, 10-11, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang (US 20030070979) in view of Yu (US 8051766) and Boyle (US 20250064676)
Regarding Claim 1, Huang discloses a plunger (control element 13b and associated elements that move up and down in the carafe 11; fig. 1) for a beverage container (para. 0003 and 0019), the plunger comprising:
a base (isolating layer 16 including connecting member 30, para. 0020) defining a flow passage (para. 0020, also indicated by arrows in figs. 2-3), wherein the base (layer 16) is circular (fig. 1);
a rod (control element 13b) connected to the base (isolating layer 16) (para. 0019; figs. 2-3);
a gasket (tight unit 19) disposed about a perimeter of the base (para. 0026; figs. 2-3); and
a valve system (valve body 23 and valve bodies 171’s) connected to the base (isolating layer 16) and disposed at least partially within the flow passage (para. 0023 and 0025; figs. 2-3), wherein the valve system comprises:
a first valve (valve body 23) selectively deflectable away from the base (isolating layer 16) (it is noted according to attached Vocabulary definition, https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/deflect, “deflect” is interpreted to mean turn away. As shown in fig. 3, the valve body 23 is turned away from the layer 16), from a first valve flow-closed condition (fig. 2) to a first valve flow-open condition (fig. 3) (para. 0023), wherein at least a portion of the first valve (valve body 23) defines an edge at least partially concentric with the perimeter of the base (para. 0023. It is noted that the layer 16 has circular shape and the valve body 23 has circular shape. The valve body 23 is disposed in the center of the carafe 11, therefore it shares the same center as the layer 16; figs. 2-3); and
a second valve (valve bodies 171’s), wherein the second valve is selectively openable from a second valve flow-closed condition (fig. 3) to a second valve flow-open condition (fig. 2) (para. 0025), wherein the valve system (valve body 23 and valve bodies 171’s) is configured such that the valve system comprises a single first valve (valve body 23) and a plurality of the second valves (valve bodies 171’s) that are separately positioned (it is noted the valve bodies 171’s are provided at separate locations on the layer 16: one on the left of the valve hole 182 and another on the right of the valve hole 182; figs. 2-3), wherein the first valve (valve body 23) and the plurality of the second valves (valve bodies 171’s) are formed from a unitary part (according to Webster, “unitary” is interpreted to mean relating to a unit. According to para. 0022 of Huang, the unit 20 (i.e. includes valve body 23) and the unit 17 (i.e. includes valve bodies 171’s) are disposed on the isolating layer 16; figs. 1-2, all of which are parts of the plunger as a unit as seen in fig. 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
250
587
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Huang does not disclose the first valve comprising a first flexible portion and the second valve comprising a second flexible portion, wherein the second valve further comprises a pair of centrally-disposed flexible lips.
However, Yu discloses the first valve (flexible check valve 90; fig. 18) comprising a first flexible portion (“Check Valve can be made of silicone or other suitable flexible”, col. 10, lines 21-32).
PNG
media_image2.png
268
342
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the first valve of Huang with the flexible check valve 90 of Yu, because it is conventionally known to use the first valve comprising the flexible portion such that it is snuggly fit into the opening to control the fluid flow through the opening.
The modification does not disclose the second valve comprising a second flexible portion, wherein the second valve further comprises a pair of centrally-disposed flexible lips.
However, Boyle discloses a valve (duckbill valve 83; fig. 8) to allow one-way fluid flow from the body portion 82 of ampoule to a connector to deliver fluid to a patient (abstract and 0081), wherein the valve comprising a second flexible portion (flaps 83 are flexible because they are either open or close), wherein the valve further comprises a pair flexible lips (flaps 83).
PNG
media_image3.png
290
350
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the second valve of Huang (i.e. valve bodies 171’s) with the duckbill valve 83 of Boyle comprising the second flexible portion, wherein the second valve comprises the pair of flexible lips as taught by Boyle, in order to allow the reliable one-way fluid flow using the duckbill valve to ensure that the infused tea at the bottom of the carafe is separated from the tea beverage at the upper end of the carafe (abstract and para. 0081 of Boyle). The modification would result in the structure shown, wherein the second valve (duckbill valve 83 of Boyle) comprises the pair of centrally-disposed flexible lips (flaps 83 of Boyle) (the flaps 83 are centrally disposed with respect to the center of the carafe).
PNG
media_image4.png
530
835
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Huang discloses the plunger (fig. 1) further comprising a screen (filter layer 14) disposed adjacent the base (layer 16 including connecting member 30) (para. 0020; fig. 1. It is noted the layer 16 and member 30 form the base).
Regarding Claim 5, Huang discloses the plunger (fig. 1), wherein the first valve (valve body 23) forms a seal against the base (layer 16) when the first flexible portion (modified valve body 23 comprising flexible material) is in the first valve flow-closed position (fig. 2) (para. 0023).
Regarding Claim 10, the modification discloses wherein the first flexible portion (check valve 90 of Yu) comprises at least one flexible flap (fig. 18 of Yu) (according to Webster definition, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/flap, “flap” is interpreted to mean something that is flat), wherein the at least one flexible flap circumscribes a valve receiver portion of the base (annotated fig. 2 of Huang. The flap of valve 23 is bigger than the opening to block off fluid flow), and wherein the base (layer 16 of Huang) comprises a plurality of flow-through openings (181’s and 182) disposed below the at least one flexible flap (flap of valve 23) (fig. 3 of Huang).
PNG
media_image5.png
1284
1584
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 11, Huang discloses an apparatus (fig. 1) comprising:
a beverage container (carafe 11) comprising a sidewall comprising an inner surface at least partially defining an interior container volume (fig. 1); and
a plunger (control element 13b and associated elements that move and down the carafe 11; fig. 1) slidingly disposed in the interior container volume (fig. 1), comprising:
a base (isolating layer 16) defining a flow passage (para. 0020, also indicated by arrows in figs. 2-3);
a rod (control element 13b) connected to the base (layer 16) (figs. 2-3);
a gasket (tight unit 19) disposed about a perimeter of the base (para. 0026; figs. 2-3), the gasket forming a seal against an inner surface of the sidewall (para. 0026); and
a valve system (valve body 23 and valve bodies 171’s) connected to the base (layer 16) and disposed at least partially within the flow passage (para. 0023 and 0025; figs. 2-3), wherein the valve system comprises:
a first valve (valve body 23) selectively deflectable away from the base (layer 16) (it is noted according to attached Vocabulary definition, https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/deflect, “deflect” is interpreted to mean turn away. As shown in fig. 3, the valve body 23 is turned away from the layer 16), from a first valve flow-closed condition (fig. 2) to a first valve flow-open condition (fig. 3) (para. 0023), wherein the first valve (valve body 23) forms a seal against the base (layer 16) when the first flexible portion of the first valve is deposed in the first valve flow-closed position (para. 0023; fig. 2), and the first valve (valve body 23) deflects away from the base (layer 16) when the first flexible portion of the first valve (valve body 23) is deposed in the first valve flow-open position (fig. 3),
a second valve (valve bodies 171’s) that is formed as a unitary part with the first valve (according to Webster, “unitary” is interpreted to mean relating to a unit. According to para. 0022 of Huang, the unit 20 (i.e. includes valve body 23) and the unit 17 (i.e. includes valve bodies 171’s) are disposed on the isolating layer 16; figs. 1-2, all of which are parts of the plunger as a unit as seen in fig. 1), the second valve is selectively openable from a second valve flow-closed condition (fig. 3) to a second valve flow-open condition (fig. 2) (para. 0025),
PNG
media_image1.png
250
587
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein during a first sliding movement of the plunger (when control element 13b is moved upwardly; fig. 3), the first valve (valve body 23) is deposed in the first valve flow-open position (fig. 3), and the second valve (valve bodies 171’s) is disposed in the second valve flow-closed position (para. 0032; fig. 3),
wherein during a second sliding movement of the plunger (when control element 13b is moved downward; fig. 2), the second valve (valve bodies 171’s) opens into the second valve flow-open position (para. 0032; fig. 2), and the first valve (valve body 23) is deposed in the first valve flow-closed position (para. 0032; fig. 2), and
wherein during a still position of the plunger (when the control element 13b stops moving), the first valve remains in the first valve flow-closed position, and the second valve remains in the second valve flow-closed position (“non-return unit (17) closes under the hydraulic pressure on the upper layer while the valve door (162) of the passive non-return unit (20) is also in a closed state due to the free downward movement of the valve body (23) of the control element (13b)”, para. 0032).
Huang does not disclose the first valve comprising a first flexible portion.
However, Yu discloses the first valve (flexible check valve 90; fig. 18) comprising a first flexible portion (“Check Valve can be made of silicone or other suitable flexible”, col. 10, lines 21-32).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the first valve of Huang with the flexible check valve 90 of Yu, because it is conventionally known to use the first valve comprising the flexible portion such that it is snuggly fit into the opening to control the fluid flow through the opening.
The modification does not disclose the second valve comprising a second flexible portion, wherein the second flexible portion comprises a pair of lips, the pair of lips forming a seal when the second flexible portion is disposed in the second valve flow-closed position, and the pair of lips deflecting away from each other when the second flexible portion is in the second valve flow-open position.
However, Boyle discloses a valve (duckbill valve 83; fig. 8) to allow one-way fluid flow from the body portion 82 of ampoule to a connector to deliver fluid to a patient (abstract and 0081), wherein the valve comprising a second flexible portion (flaps 83 are flexible because they are either open or close), wherein the second flexible portion (flaps 83) comprises a pair of lips (flaps 83), the pair of lips forming a seal when the second flexible portion is disposed in the second valve flow-closed position, and the pair of lips deflecting away from each other when the second flexible portion is in the second valve flow-open position (para. 0081).
PNG
media_image3.png
290
350
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the second valve of Huang (i.e. valve bodies 171’s) with the duckbill valve 83 of Boyle comprising the second flexible portion, wherein the second valve comprises the pair of flexible lips as taught by Boyle, in order to allow the reliable one-way fluid flow using the duckbill valve to ensure that the infused tea at the bottom of the carafe is separated from the tea beverage at the upper end of the carafe (abstract and para. 0081 of Boyle). The modification would result in the structure shown, wherein the second valve (duckbill valve 83 of Boyle) comprises the pair of flexible lips (flaps 83 of Boyle).
PNG
media_image4.png
530
835
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 21, the modification discloses substantially all of the claimed features as set forth above. Huang discloses the apparatus further comprising a cap (lid 12; fig. 1).
The modification does not disclose the cap is removably connected to an upper end of the beverage container, and wherein the cap forms a leak-proof seal around a perimeter of the sidewall.
However, Yu further discloses the apparatus comprises a cap (lid 16), wherein the cap is removably connected to an upper end of the beverage container (cup or housing), and wherein the cap forms a leak-proof seal around a perimeter of the sidewall (col. 7, lines 1-14; fig. 6).
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 cap of Huang to be removably connected to the beverage container and the cap forms a leak-proof seal around the sidewall of the container as further taught by Yu, in order to prevent spillage while the user carries the container for consumption.
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the modification of Huang (US 20030070979), Yu (US 8051766), and Boyle (US 20250064676) as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Kim (US 20200216233)
Regarding Claim 3, the modification discloses substantially all of the claimed features as set forth above. Huang discloses the valve system comprising the valve body 23 of the valve system is removably connected to the base (layer 16) (para. 0024; fig. 3).
The modification does not disclose the valve system comprising the modified valve bodies 171’s (i.e. duckbill valve 83 of Boyle) are removably connected to the base.
However, Kim discloses the duckbill valve is removably connected to the inner cap by the valve holder 30 (para. 0025 and 0028; figs. 2-3).
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 duckbill valve’s 83 of Boyle to be removably connected to the base (layer 16 of Huang) by incorporating the valve holder 30 as taught by Kim, in order to separate the duckbill valves 83 of Boyle from the base 16 of Huang to be cleaned as needed, thereby enabling hygienic care (para. 0028 of Kim).
Regarding Claim 4, Huang discloses the plunger (fig. 1), wherein the valve body 23 of the valve system further comprises a detent (spring) for removably connecting the valve body 23 of the valve system to the base (layer 16) (para. 0024) (according to attached Webster definition, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/detent, “detent” is interpreted to a device for holding one part in relation to another).
The modification of Huang, Yu, Boyle, and Kim discloses the valve system (duckbill valve 10 of Kim) comprises a detent (valve holder of Kim) for removably connecting the valve system (duckbill valve 10 of Kim) to the base (layer 16 of Huang).
PNG
media_image6.png
218
812
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the modification of Huang (US 20030070979), Yu (US 8051766), and Boyle (US 20250064676) as applied to claim 11 above, further in view of Morse (US 20170360240)
Regarding Claim 12, the modification discloses substantially all of the claimed features as set forth above, except wherein the beverage container further comprises an outer surface, the outer surface and inner surface defining an insulating volume therebetween.
However, Morse discloses the beverage container (infusing container 112) further comprises an outer surface, the outer surface and inner surface (double-layered wall) defining an insulating volume (insulative substance) therebetween (para. 0067).
PNG
media_image7.png
546
336
media_image7.png
Greyscale
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 beverage container of Huang to include the double-layered wall with the insulative substance therebetween as taught by Morse, in order to retain heat within the beverage container to keep the beverage at desired temperature.
Regarding Claim 13, the modification discloses substantially all of the claimed features as set forth above, except wherein the gasket comprises a pair of flexible protrusions in slidable contact with the inner surface of the sidewall.
However, Morse discloses the gasket (sealing means 30) comprises a pair of flexible protrusions (double pointed gasket; fig. 1) in slidable contact with the inner surface of the sidewall (wall of the container 12) (“Sealing means 30 consisting of a double pointed gasket”, para. 0045).
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 gasket of Huang to include the pair of the flexible protrusions in slidable contact with the sidewall as taught by Morse, in order to effectively prevent the extract material from leaking around the gasket.
Claims 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the modification of Huang (US 20030070979), Yu (US 8051766), and Boyle (US 20250064676) as applied to claim 11 above, further in view of Beber (US 20160255989)
Regarding Claim 14, the modification discloses substantially all of the claimed features as set forth above, except the apparatus further comprising:
a perforated plate having a first opening configured to allow passage of the rod, the perforated plate being removably connected to an upper end of the beverage container; and a filter supported by the perforated plate.
However, Beber discloses a perforated plate (lower lid member 134) having a first opening (central aperture 135) configured to allow passage of the rod (plunger assembly 30) (para. 0051; figs. 13, 5, and 4C), the perforated plate (lower lid member 134) being removably connected to an upper end of the beverage container (para. 0032); and a filter (filter assembly 286) supported by the perforated plate (para. 0051; fig. 13).
PNG
media_image8.png
578
386
media_image8.png
Greyscale
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 apparatus of Huang to include the perforated plate having the first opening to accommodate the rod and configured to support the filter as taught by Beber, in order to provide a secondary filtering system at the upper end of the beverage container such that unwanted debris is not included in the user’s beverage (para. 0051 of Beber).
Regarding Claim 15, Beber discloses the perforated plate (lower lid member 134) is configured to slidably receive the rod (plunger assembly 30) and is further configured to center the rod within the beverage container (container 12) (para. 0051; fig. 5), and wherein the perforated plate (lower lid member 134) comprises a plurality of second openings (porous bottom wall 285) configured to allow the passage of fluid (“Lower lid member 134 is contemplated to have a porous bottom wall 285 disposed within the inner vessel 140 and adjacent to the spout 20 of the outer container 12. In this way, fluid can pass through the bottom wall 285 of the lower lid member 134 from the inner vessel 140”, para. 0150).
Response to Amendment
With respect to claim objections: since amendments made to the claims, therefore the claim objections are withdrawn.
With respect to 112b rejections: since amendments made to the claims, therefore the 112b rejections are withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to prior art rejections filed on 12/17/2025, have been fully considered but are respectfully considered moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejections.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BONITA KHLOK whose telephone number is (571)270-7313. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 9:00am-6pm.
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 on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BONITA KHLOK/ Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/HELENA KOSANOVIC/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights