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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112 (b) for being indefinite since it is not clear what “or other common substances” is. Additionally, it is not clear if “the solute could be sodium chloride, calcium carbonate, magnesium carbonate, zinc carbonate, sodium hydrogen carbonate, or other common substances” specifically requires one of the solutes, or if it is an optional limitation. Correction/clarification is required.
Claims 8, 13, 18, 23, and 28 depend on claim 3 and do not correct/clarify the 35 U.S.C. 112 (b) indefinite rejection of claim 3, and therefore claims 8, 13, 18, 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112 (b) for being indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bissen (U.S. Publication 2019/0152757) in view of Bhutani (U.S. Publication 2019/0059633) in further view of Zhu (CN215334633U a machine translation is provided).
Regarding claim 1, Bissen teaches a machine spring generator (paragraph 2 teaches a mineralization device), comprising: a dispenser (paragraph 2 teaches a beverage dispenser), a pipeline structure (figure 1 is considered reading on the pipeline structure) comprising a pipeline (including piping from item 106 to 110) and at least two injection channels that are disposed in the dispenser (conduits 216, 218, 220, and 224), wherein two ends of the pipeline respectively have a water inlet (inlet item 202 which receives water from item 102) and a water outlet (item 204), a metering device connected between the pipeline (item 130 metering device which is in between items 202 and 204) each of the two injection channels has an inner end (ends proximate items 132, 134, 136, and 138), an outer end (the lower end of the conduit proximate items 216b, 218b, 220b, and 222b), and a dosing device connected between the inner end and outer end (items 120, 122, 124, and 126), the inner ends of the at least two injection channels are connected to the pipeline at intervals along a direction of water flow in the pipeline (items 216, 218, 220, and 224 are connected along an interval from item 202 to 204); at least two mineral containers disposed in the dispenser (items 132, 134, 136, 138 which are taught as mineralization vessels in paragraph 48), and respectively connected to the outer end of one of the at least two injection channels (items 48 are connected to the outer end of items 216, 218, 220, and 224 via items 120, 122, 124, and 126), wherein each of the at least two material containers is filled with a mineral spring concentrate (paragraph 48 teaches the storage of mineralization fluid, which are considered reading on mineral spring concentrate since they make the water capable of being consumed by humans, see paragraph 4); and a programmable controller disposed in the machine body and electrically controlling the dosing device of the at least two injection channels (paragraph 22 teaches a controller to control the dosing devices) to respectively add the mineral spring concentrates in the at least two material containers to different positions of the pipeline (each dosing device items 120, 122, 124, 126, and 128 ). Regarding claim 1, Bissen is silent to a machine body, a solenoid valve and a micromotor. Regarding claim 1, Bhutani teaches a machine body (item 200) for mineralizing water (paragraph 42) using a solenoid valve for dispensing fluid (paragraph 32). Regarding claim 1, Zhu teaches using a micromotor for actuating a control valve (page 2, paragraph starting with “The valve body” teaches a micromotor which is used to drive a valve body) for treating water (page 2, Background, first two lines). Regarding claim 1, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the water treatment dispenser of Bissen with the machine body and valve configuration of Bhutani to allow for easier dispensing operation by a user. Additionally, regarding claim 1, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the dispenser of Bissen in view of Bhutani with the micromotor actuating a valve configuration of Zhu in order to obtain a desired degree of accuracy in the dispensing operation. All three references are concerned with water treatment and considered in the same field of endeavor.
Regarding claim 2, Bissen teaches wherein a saturation concentration of each of the mineral spring concentrates at an environmental temperature is smaller than a concentration of being supersaturated to reduce or prevent a formation of crystals (paragraph 48 teaches the vessels house mineralization fluids which is considered inherently having a concentration that excludes crystals which are a solid).
Regarding claim 3, Bissen teaches a spring mineralization concentrate fluid having a solute in a liquid (paragraph 48 teaches mineralization fluids which inherently have a solute in a liquid, paragraph 11 teaches the fluid may be a liquid), and teaches other common substances (paragraph 4 teaches flavoring fluids which are considered common substances since mineralized water is considered a common substance).
Regarding claim 4, Bissen teaches wherein the programmable controller controls the micromotors to add the mineral spring concentrates in the at least two material containers to the pipeline at time intervals (see paragraph 53 which teaches the materials can be fed in a specific order which is considered reading on specific time intervals).
Regarding claim 5, Bissen teaches wherein the programmable controller controls a time of each of the dosing devices operating in an addition session to correspondingly adjust an addition amount of one of the mineral spring concentrates added to the pipeline and the water outlet in the addition session (see paragraph 53 which teaches the materials can be fed in a specific order which is considered reading on specific time intervals using the dosing devices).Regarding claim 5, Bissen is silent to the micromotors. Regarding claim 5, Zhu teaches using a micromotor for actuating a control valve (page 2, paragraph starting with “The valve body” teaches a micromotor which is used to drive a valve body) for treating water (page 2, Background, first two lines). Regarding claim 5, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the dispenser of Bissen in view of Bhutani with the micromotor actuating a valve configuration of Zhu in order to obtain a desired degree of accuracy in the dispensing operation. All three references are concerned with water treatment and considered in the same field of endeavor.
Bissen is silent to the language of claim 6. Regarding claim 6, Bhutani teaches wherein the machine body comprises a case (figure 2 housing item 202); a bottle receiving room is formed by recessing into a surface of a front side of the case (see figure 8 which shows the door open, and a recess into the front side of the housing where items 802, 804, 812, and 814); the at least two material containers are disposed in the bottle receiving room (items 802, 804, 812, and 814 are housed in the recess formed in the housing as shown in figure 8). Regarding claim 6, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the water treatment dispenser of Bissen with the machine body and valve configuration of Bhutani to allow for easier dispensing operation by a user.
Bissen is silent to the language of claim 7. Regarding claim 7, Bhutani teaches wherein the machine body comprises a case (figure 2 housing item 202); a bottle receiving room is formed by recessing into a surface of a front side of the case (see figure 8 which shows the door open, and a recess into the front side of the housing where items 802, 804, 812, and 814); the at least two material containers are disposed in the bottle receiving room (items 802, 804, 812, and 814 are housed in the recess formed in the housing as shown in figure 8). Regarding claim 7, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the water treatment dispenser of Bissen with the machine body and valve configuration of Bhutani to allow for easier dispensing operation by a user.
Bissen is silent to the language of claim 8. Regarding claim 8, Bhutani teaches wherein the machine body comprises a case (figure 2 housing item 202); a bottle receiving room is formed by recessing into a surface of a front side of the case (see figure 8 which shows the door open, and a recess into the front side of the housing where items 802, 804, 812, and 814); the at least two material containers are disposed in the bottle receiving room (items 802, 804, 812, and 814 are housed in the recess formed in the housing as shown in figure 8). Regarding claim 8, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the water treatment dispenser of Bissen with the machine body and valve configuration of Bhutani to allow for easier dispensing operation by a user.
Bissen is silent to the language of claim 9. Regarding claim 9, Bhutani teaches wherein the machine body comprises a case (figure 2 housing item 202); a bottle receiving room is formed by recessing into a surface of a front side of the case (see figure 8 which shows the door open, and a recess into the front side of the housing where items 802, 804, 812, and 814); the at least two material containers are disposed in the bottle receiving room (items 802, 804, 812, and 814 are housed in the recess formed in the housing as shown in figure 8). Regarding claim 9, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the water treatment dispenser of Bissen with the machine body and valve configuration of Bhutani to allow for easier dispensing operation by a user.
Bissen is silent to the language of claim 10. Regarding claim 10, Bhutani teaches wherein the machine body comprises a case (figure 2 housing item 202); a bottle receiving room is formed by recessing into a surface of a front side of the case (see figure 8 which shows the door open, and a recess into the front side of the housing where items 802, 804, 812, and 814); the at least two material containers are disposed in the bottle receiving room (items 802, 804, 812, and 814 are housed in the recess formed in the housing as shown in figure 8). Regarding claim 10, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the water treatment dispenser of Bissen with the machine body and valve configuration of Bhutani to allow for easier dispensing operation by a user.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 25, 26, 27, 29, and 30 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.
Regarding claim 11, 12, 14, and 15 the prior art does not teach or fairly suggest the suction tube assembly with the cap, flange, and the sleeve fitting around the suction tube.
Regarding claims 16, 17, 19, and 20 the prior art does not teach or fairly suggest the combination of the bottle grooves, injection holes, sleeve, and suction tube.
Claims 13, 18, 23, and 28 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 13, the prior art does not teach or fairly suggest the suction tube assembly with the cap, flange, and the sleeve fitting around the suction tube.
Regarding claim 18, the prior art does not teach or fairly suggest the combination of the bottle grooves, injection holes, sleeve, and suction tube.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANSHU BHATIA whose telephone number is (571)270-7628. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 11 a.m. to 7:30 p.m..
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, Claire Wang can be reached at (571)270-1051. 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.
/ANSHU BHATIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774