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. 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. Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, wherein the chamber sections are “ all formed with conical inner surfaces” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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. 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 appl icant regards as his invention. GROUND 1 : Claims 1-15 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 1 recites, in part, “wherein the mixing chamber comprises chamber sections arranged one behind the other ” and “with a first chamber and a second chamber which are arranged one behind the other ”, which leads to confusion as to the particular configuration the Applicant intends to claim. In view of the specification and drawings, it appears the chamber sections (12, 13, 15, 15, 16, 120, 130) are in a stacked configuration, that is, in a sequential order from top to bottom. However, the current claim language “one behind the other” leads to confusion, in that the chambers are possibly arranged in a horizontal configuration. The word “behind”, by definition means “ at or toward the rear of ” or similarly “ on the farther side of; beyond ” (see https://www.dictionary.com/browse/behind ). Thus, the word “behind” does not appear to be consistent with the drawings and what is well known to a POSITA. Appropriate clarification and correction is required. Claim 1 also recites “ wherein the chamber sections arranged one behind the other are all formed with conical inner surfaces ” which leads to confusion as to what the Applicant intends the word “conical” to mean. A POSITA would understand “conical” to mean the chamber walls as having both a cylindrical cross section (i.e. circular circumference) as well as having a taper along the length thereof, as the chamber “ tapers towards a point of the cone ” . However, no embodiments are illustrated wherein all chamber walls meet both conditions. In particular, Figs. 14-17, which appear to be directed to the claimed invention, do not illustrate all chamber walls as being tapered to the point of the cone. Appropriate clarification and correction is required. Claims 2-15 are rejected as being necessarily dependent upon claim 1. Claims 2 recites, in part, the “floor 34a being arranged with a circumferential angle to a horizontal slightly inclined towards the chamber axis” which leads to confusion in view of the use of the term “ circumferential angle ”. A POSITA understands that a circumferential angle , also known as an inscribed angle, is formed by two chords in a circle that share an endpoint on the circle’s circumference. However, this does not appear to be the definition with which the Applicant is applying to describe the instant invention. In view of the specification and drawings, it appears floor 34a is arranged at an inclined angle with respct to a horizontal axis of the chamber, thus ensuring instant powder is gravity fed into the second chamber. The use of the term “circumferential angle” does not appear to appropriate for describing an angle of inclination. Appropriate clarification and correction is required. Claim 11 recites the limitation "the valve unit" in line 2 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. 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. GROUND 2 : Claim(s) 1- 2 , 4-8 and 12-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0315392 to Dubief et al. In regard to claim s 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 behind 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 the chamber sections arranged one behind the other are all 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 behind 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). In regard to claim 2 , Dubief et al. disclose a beverage preparation device , 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 a circumferential angle α to a horizontal slightly inclined inwardly towards the chamber axis of the second chamber, said angle α has a value in a range of 5° to 10° (See Figs. 2-3 and para 0103-0109). 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 claim s 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). 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 3 : Claim (s) 8 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 DE 1429877 to Daum . In regard to claim 3 , Dubief 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. from plastic in view of manufacturing benefits (e.g. cost, durability) as taught by Daum and is extremely well known in the art. GROUND 4 : 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 DE 202010010509 to Franke. In regard to claim s 9-11 , Dubief 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. to a cleaning unit to enable a user to clean the unit as desired as taught by Franke . Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT MATTHEW J KASZTEJNA whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-6086 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Eileen Lillis can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 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