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 .
Notice of Amendment
In response to the amendment filed June 25, 2026, amended claims 1 and 11 and canceled claim 2 are acknowledged. The following new grounds of rejection are set forth:
Specification
The following guidelines illustrate the preferred layout for the specification of a utility application. These guidelines are suggested for the applicant’s use.
Arrangement of the Specification
As provided in 37 CFR 1.77(b), the specification of a utility application should include the following sections in order. Each of the lettered items should appear in upper case, without underlining or bold type, as a section heading. If no text follows the section heading, the phrase “Not Applicable” should follow the section heading:
(a) TITLE OF THE INVENTION.
(b) CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS.
(c) STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT.
(d) THE NAMES OF THE PARTIES TO A JOINT RESEARCH AGREEMENT.
(e) INCORPORATION-BY-REFERENCE OF MATERIAL SUBMITTED ON A READ-ONLY OPTICAL DISC, AS A TEXT FILE OR AN XML FILE VIA THE PATENT ELECTRONIC SYSTEM.
(f) STATEMENT REGARDING PRIOR DISCLOSURES BY THE INVENTOR OR A JOINT INVENTOR.
(g) BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION.
(1) Field of the Invention.
(2) Description of Related Art including information disclosed under 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98.
(h) BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION.
(i) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWING(S).
(j) DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION.
(k) CLAIM OR CLAIMS (commencing on a separate sheet).
(l) ABSTRACT OF THE DISCLOSURE (commencing on a separate sheet).
(m) SEQUENCE LISTING. (See MPEP § 2422.03 and 37 CFR 1.821 - 1.825). A “Sequence Listing” is required on paper if the application discloses a nucleotide or amino acid sequence as defined in 37 CFR 1.821(a) and if the required “Sequence Listing” is not submitted as an electronic document either on read-only optical disc or as a text file via the patent electronic system.
A substitute specification excluding the claims is required pursuant to 37 CFR 1.125(a) because of the lack of headings discussed above.
A substitute specification must not contain new matter. The substitute specification must be submitted with markings showing all the changes relative to the immediate prior version of the specification of record. The text of any added subject matter must be shown by underlining the added text. The text of any deleted matter must be shown by strike-through except that double brackets placed before and after the deleted characters may be used to show deletion of five or fewer consecutive characters. The text of any deleted subject matter must be shown by being placed within double brackets if strike-through cannot be easily perceived. An accompanying clean version (without markings) and a statement that the substitute specification contains no new matter must also be supplied. Numbering the paragraphs of the specification of record is not considered a change that must be shown.
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.
GROUND 1: Claim(s) 1, 4-8 and 12-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0315392 to Dubief et al. in view of U.S. Patent No. 8,960,079 to Gugerli et al.
In regard to claims 1 and 15, Dubief et al. disclose a beverage preparation device for preparing instant beverages, comprising: a conveyor system, a mixing chamber, at least one pump, at least one heat exchanger, at least one valve and a control device (see Fig. 1 and paras 0012-0072), wherein the mixing chamber 1 comprises at least two flush-in connections 2, 21 configured for respectively injecting a jet of a liquid medium into the mixing chamber, wherein the at least two flush-in connections are arranged at a distance from each other in a direction of a chamber axis of the mixing chamber (see Fig. 2), wherein the mixing chamber comprises chamber sections arranged one beneath the other, wherein inner diameters of said chamber sections decrease starting from a chamber inlet of the mixing chamber to a chamber outlet of the mixing chamber, wherein at least some of the chamber sections arranged one beneath the other are formed with conical inner surfaces (see Figs. 3-5a), and wherein the mixing chamber comprises an asymmetrical structure (See Fig. 2), which is free of mixer/mixing wheels, with a first chamber and a second chamber which are arranged one beneath the other, a chamber axis of the first chamber and a chamber axis of the second chamber being displaced with an offset with respect to one another and thus being arranged eccentrically with respect to one another (See paras 0100-0106), wherein the first chamber of the mixing chamber is formed with a plane section that comprises a floor with an inner surface, said floor 12 being arranged with an inclined angle α to a horizontal slightly inclined inwardly towards the chamber axis of the second chamber (See Figs. 2-3 and para 0103-0109). Dubief et al. are silent with respect to the specific inclined angle as claimed, specifically wherein said angle α has a value in a range of 5° to 10°. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide the floor with an include angle of 5° to 10°, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Furthermore, Gugerli et al. teach of an analogous beverage preparation device comprising a bottom wall 14 that can be conical so that spreading of the layer of liquid is promoted, where the angle of the cone of the bottom wall can vary from 1 to 45 degrees (Col. 9, Lines 11-15), therefore teaching the bottom wall comprises an inclined angle α to a horizontal slightly inclined inwardly towards the chamber axis of the second chamber, wherein said angle α has a value in a range of 5° to 10°. Thus, it would have been obvious to a POSITA to construct the inclined angle of the floor of Dubief et al. to have a range of 5° to 10 to promote spreading the layer of liquid without causing the powder thereon to immediately slide into the outlet opening, as taught by Gugerli et al.
In regard to claim 4, Dubief et al. disclose a beverage preparation device, wherein a first flush-in connection of the at least two flush-in connections comprises a through opening which opens into a first chamber section of the chamber sections of the mixing chamber, and wherein a second flush-in connection of the at least two flush-in connections comprises a through opening which opens into a third chamber section of the chamber sections of the mixing chamber (See Figs. 2-5a and paras 0110-0120).
In regard to claim 5, Dubief et al. disclose a beverage preparation device, wherein the through opening of the second flush-in connection comprises a smaller internal diameter than that of the through opening of the first flush-in connection (See Figs. 4 and 5a).
In regard to claims 6-7, Dubief et al. disclose a beverage preparation device, wherein the first flush-in connection and the second flush-in connection are configured to be preset or adjustably supplied with a medium or different media simultaneously or with a time delay via a common valve or in each case via a separate valve independently of one another (See Figs. 1, 4 and 5a and paras 0061, 0091 and 0110-0120). It is noted, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
In regard to claim 8, Dubief et al. disclose a beverage preparation device, wherein the mixing chamber is arranged vertically and comprises a chamber outlet pointing vertically downwards (See Figs. 2-5a).
In regard to claim 12, Dubief et al. disclose a beverage preparation device, wherein the mixing chamber is configured to be inserted into the beverage preparation device and removed again from the beverage preparation device, wherein a correct seating of the mixing chamber in a holder is detected by a limit switch or/and reed contact (See Figs. 2-5a). It is noted, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
In regard to claim 13, Dubief et al. disclose a beverage preparation device, wherein at least one flow guiding element 31 is arranged in the mixing chamber in an interior space of the chamber (See Fig. 5b).
In regard to claim 14, Dubief et al. disclose a beverage preparation device, wherein the mixing chamber comprises, in the interior space of the chamber, at least one attached deflection wall 4 which is arranged in a path of a transport flow of the jet of the injected medium (See Figs. 2-5a).
GROUND 2: Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0315392 to Dubief et al. in view of U.S. Patent No. 8,960,079 to Gugerli et al. in further view of DE 1429877 to Daum.
In regard to claim 3, Dubief et al. and Gugerli et al. disclose a beverage preparation device comprising a mixing chamber (see rejections above) but are silent with respect to the specific material used to construct the chamber, wherein the mixing chamber is made of a metal material, a plastic or a combination of metal material and plastic and is designed to be seal-free. Daum teaches of an analogous mixing chamber for a beverage dispenser made of plastic (See para 0004). It would have been obvious to a POSITA to construct the mixing chamber of Dubief et al. and Gugerli et al. from plastic in view of manufacturing benefits (e.g. cost, durability) as taught by Daum and is extremely well known in the art.
GROUND 3: Claim(s) 9-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0315392 to Dubief et al. in view of U.S. Patent No. 8,960,079 to Gugerli et al. in further view of DE 202010010509 to Franke.
In regard to claims 9-11, Dubief et al. and Gugerli et al. disclose a beverage preparation device comprising a mixing chamber (see rejections above) but are silent with respect to the discharge chamber being connect to a valve unit. Franke teaches of an analogous mixing chamber for a beverage dispenser connecting to a cleaning container (See Fig. 1 and paras 0062-0074). It would have been obvious to a POSITA to connect the mixing chamber of Dubief et al. and Gugerli et al. to a cleaning unit to enable a user to clean the unit as desired as taught by Franke.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's remarks and amendments filed June 25, 2026, have been fully considered and will be addressed as follows with respect to the previously presented claim interpretations and rejections:
Specification:
The objection to the specification is maintained for the reasons stated above. Appclaint remarked that a substitute specification has been filed, however no replacement specification is found. The amendments to the specification on file are as reproduced as follows:
PNG
media_image1.png
241
715
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Applicant is encouraged to resubmit the replacement specification.
Drawings:
In view of the amendments filed June 25, 2026, the objection to the drawings is withdrawn.
GROUND 1 (112b rejections):
In view of the amendments filed June 25, 2026, the rejection of claims 1-15 as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor regards as the invention is withdrawn.
GROUND 2 (102 rejections in view of Dubief et al.):
In view of the amendments filed June 23, 2026, the rejection of claims 1-2, 4-8 and 12-15 as being anticipated by Dubief et al. is withdrawn.
GROUND 3 (103 rejection in view of Dubief et al. and Daum):
In view of the amendments filed June 25, 2026, the rejection of claim 8 as being unpatentable in view Dubief et al. and Daum is withdrawn.
GROUND 4 (103 rejection in view of Dubief et al. and Franke):
In view of the amendments filed June 25, 2026, the rejection of claims 9-11 as being unpatentable in view Dubief et al. and Franke is withdrawn.
It is noted, in view of the amendments filed June 25, 2026, new GROUNDS 1-3 are applied to claims 1 and 3-15 above.
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 MATTHEW J KASZTEJNA whose telephone number is (571)272-6086. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 7AM--3PM.
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, Eileen Lillis can be reached at 571-272-6928. 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.
/MATTHEW J KASZTEJNA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3993
Prosecution Insights