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 with traverse of group I and specie 1, fig. 6, in the reply filed on 2/10/26 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that a search can be conducted without serious burden on the office and that the proposed method is not materially different than the claimed method. This is not found persuasive because the different groups would require different search terms/strategies. Also, the proposed method is materially different because providing pressure is materially different than only using gravity to move water through the filter.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: 1228.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: In the written description reference 1225 is used to describe both the shell body and the inlet.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 31 appears to have a typo and should read, “slope-downward”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 5 and 8-10 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "said at least one filter". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes the claim is assumed to recite, "said at least one filter element".
Claim 8 recites the limitation "said filter cartridge". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes the claim is assumed to recite, "said at least one filter element".
Claim 9 recites the limitation "said filter cartridge". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes the claim is assumed to recite, "said at least one filter element".
Claim 10 recites the limitation "said filter cartridge". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes the claim is assumed to recite, "said at least one filter element".
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5-10 and 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nohren US 6,569,329.
Claim 1, Nohren teaches a filter cap, comprising: a bottle cap (1) comprising a ring shaped ceiling wall having a cap opening (1b), a circular outer rim (1a) integrally extended from a circular outer edge of the ceiling wall and configured for mounting on a bottle opening of a water bottle, and a filter arrangement comprising: a tubular inner connector (5) integrally and inwardly extended around the cap opening of the bottle cap to define an outlet of the bottle cap therein, an elongated hollow cylindrical cartridge shell comprising: a first end wall (10) at a first end thereof, a second end wall (7) at a second end thereof, a tubular secure head (at 16) inwardly formed and extended from the second end wall and configured to be detachably and sealedly connected with the inner connector so as to coaxially couple the cartridge shell with the bottle cap, and a tubular surrounding shell body extending between the first and the second end and defining an inlet, which has a plurality of surrounding holes spacedly and radially formed around the surrounding shell body and a receiving chamber extending between the first and second end walls inside the cartridge shell and communicating with outside through the plurality of holes in such a manner that fluid contained in a bottle to enter the receiving chamber via the plurality of surrounding holes, such that when the secure head is connected with the inner connector of the bottle cap, the outlet of the cartridge shell is coaxially aligned with the cap opening, a filter element (17) in the receiving chamber of the cartridge shell, means for holding the filter element in position within the receiving chamber (8) in such a manner that one end of the filter element is securely coupled with the outlet of the bottle cap to ensure fluid entered through the inlet of the cartridge shell to pass through the filter element and dispense through the outlet of the bottle cap when a bottle is inverted, thereby the filter cap can be arranged correspondingly in a dispensable condition with a bottle opening directed downward and the filter arrangement can be upwardly extended from the bottle cap to ensure the filter arrangement being immersed in the fluid around the filter arrangement which can be forced by gravity to pass through the filter element to be filtered before dispensing through the outlet of the cartridge shell and the cap opening of the bottle cap (fig. 1-2).
Claims 2, 5-9 and 16-17, Nohren further teaches the outlet is an outlet channel defined by the inner connector of the bottle cap and coaxially extended form the cap opening of the bottle cap into the receiving chamber of the cartridge shell via the inner connector when the bottle cap is securely connected with the cartridge shell (fig. 2); a ring shape recess is formed between the shell body and the secure head to configure as the holding means to hold one end portion of the filter element (fig. 2); the filter element, having a cylindrical shape and an inner through hole, is configured to be sleeved tightly with the secure head to sealingly couple one end portion of the filter element around the outlet coaxially to ensure the outlet only communicating with the inner through hole of the filter element (fig. 2); a ring shape sealer (8) being placed between the filter element and the secure head (fig. 2); a circular outer mounting surface is formed on the inner connector and the secure head has a circular inner mounting surface configured to securely and sealingly engage with the outer mounting surface of the inner connector to coaxially couple the cartridge shell with the bottle cap (fig. 1-2); and a dispenser faucet (2) to be sealedly connected to the bottle cap to selectively normally close the cap opening and open the cap opening to dispense fluid contained in a bottle to flow out through the cap opening and the dispenser faucet (fig. 1-2).
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) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nohren US 6,569,329 in view of Chen et al. US 2005/0051476.
Nohren teaches the filter cap of claim 17 but does not teach the dispenser faucet comprises an insert tube fittingly inserted in the inner connector of the bottle cap.
Chen teaches a filter cap (10) comprising a ring shaped ceiling wall having a cap opening, a circular outer rim integrally extended from a circular outer edge of the ceiling wall and configured for mounting on a bottle opening, a filter arrangement (20), a tubular inner connector (14) integrally and inwardly extended around the cap opening to define an outlet, a dispenser faucet (30) configured to be sealedly connected to the bottle cap to selectively normally close the cap opening and open the cap opening to dispense fluid contained in a bottle to flow out through the cap opening and the dispenser faucet the dispenser faucet comprises an insert tube (12) fittingly inserted in the inner connector of the bottle cap (fig. 1-2). Providing an insert tube as an extension of a dispenser faucet is a known technique in the art as a way to provide a channel for fluid through a filter cap as demonstrated by Chen. The claim would have been obvious because a particular known technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Claim(s) 21-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prchal et al. US 2017/0326482 in view of KR 200328358.
Claim 21, Prchal teaches a filter cap, comprising: a bottle cap (113) comprising a ring shaped ceiling wall having a cap opening, a circular outer rim (125) integrally extended from a circular outer edge of the ceiling wall and configured for mounting on a bottle opening of a bottle, and a filter arrangement comprising: a tubular inner connector (at 114) integrally and inwardly extended around the cap opening of the bottle cap to define an outlet of the bottle cap therein, a filter element (100), connected with the inner connector, comprising an outer enclosure shell body (101) and has an inner through hole which has one end communicating with the outlet and the cap opening (fig. 1-10). Prchal does not teach a stopper.
KR teaches a bottle cap (11) comprising a ring shaped ceiling wall having a cap opening, a circular outer rim integrally extended from a circular outer edge of the ceiling wall and configured for mounting on a bottle opening of a bottle and a stopper (10) positioned to close the cap opening, thereby the cap is arranged correspondingly in a dispensable condition that a bottle opening is directed downward and the bottle cap is upwardly facing to ensure the upward side of the cap is immersed in the fluid of a bottle (fig. 1-5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the stopper of KR because it closes the bottle cap such that fluid cannot flow out of the bottle even when the bottle is upside down until the bottle is inserted into a machine (abstract).
Claims 22, Prchal further teaches the filter element, having a cylindrical shape, is configured to be sleeved around the inner connector to sealingly couple one end portion of the filter element around the outlet coaxially to ensure the outlet only communicating with the inner through hole of the filter element (fig. 1-10).
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prchal et al. US 2017/0326482 in view of KR 200328358 as applied to claim 22 above and further in view of Jong KR 20190140066.
Prchal in view of KR ‘358 teaches the cap of claim 22 but does not teach a dispenser.
Jong teaches a filter cap comprising a bottle cap (100) with a cap opening, a filter arrangement (200) and a dispenser faucet (130) configured to be sealedly connected to the bottle cap to selectively close and open a cap opening to dispense fluid contained in a bottle to flow out through the cap opening and the dispenser faucet (fig. 1-3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the dispenser of Jong because it allows for purified fluid to be discharged or for the cap to be closed as desired by the user (abstract).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN M KURTZ whose telephone number is (571)272-8211. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-5.
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, Bobby Ramdhanie can be reached at 571-270-3240. 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.
/BENJAMIN M KURTZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1779