DETAILED ACTION
For this Office action, Claims 1-20 are pending.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 8-10 of the Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment, filed 31 December 2025, with respect to the rejections of claim independent Claim 6 and its dependents under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ibsies (US Pat Pub. 2012/0103926) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection is made in view of 35 U.S.C. 103 using Clusserath (US Pat Pub. 2010/0108180 as a secondary reference. Applicant has amended Claim 6 to further require wherein the lid stays locked until a pressure relief valve in the base releases the pressure inside the vessel, and applicant further argues that Ibsies does not disclose this limitation. Upon further consideration, the examiner agrees; the grounds of rejection are thereby withdrawn. After further search and consideration, new grounds of rejection are made that consider the amended limitations and detailed below. Since the Applicant’s Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment filed 31 December 2025 do not address these new grounds of rejection, they are considered moot and will not be addressed further at this time.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 10-12 of the Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment, filed 31 December 2025, with respect to the rejections of claim independent Claim 14 and its dependents under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fantappie et al. (herein referred to as “Fantappie”, US Pat Pub. 2012/0103926) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection are made in view of 35 U.S.C. 112(a), 35 U.S.C. 112(b) and 35 U.S.C. 103 using Peirsman et al. (herein referred to as “Peirsman”, US Pat Pub. 2016/0318746). Applicant has amended the claims to further require the inline mixer to be a single port inline mixer. Applicant further argues that the cited prior art does not disclose a single port inline mixer. Upon further consideration, the examiner agrees; and the grounds of rejection are therefore withdrawn. After further search and consideration, new grounds of rejection are made and detailed below. Since the arguments do not address these limitations, they are considered moot and will not be further considered at this time.
Applicant's arguments filed 31 December 2026 with respect to the grounds of rejection of Claim 1 and its dependents under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant has amended the claims to further require a customizable amount of one or more supplements to the fluids. Applicant further argues that the 103 rejection is inappropriate because the justification of “spatial convenience” for the modification of Fantappie in view of Ibsies is incorrect, since such a modification would not save any space. Upon further consideration, the examiner respectfully disagrees. See Ibsies Paragraph [0004], which discloses the issues with flowing water through a typical fountain orientation similar to that taught in Fantappie. Applicant also argues that the cited prior art does not disclose a customizable amount of one or more supplements to the fluids. On this point, the examiner respectfully disagrees, as the abstract states that the beverage recipe (and therefore the supplements to the fluids) may be customized. For these reasons, the grounds of rejection of Claim 1 and its dependents stand in view of the Applicant’s arguments.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 14, upon which Claims 15-20 are dependent, has been amended to recite “a single port inline mixer. Upon further consideration, the specification, drawings nor claims as originally filed disclose such a single port inline mixer; therefore, the limitation is considered new matter. The specification and drawing seem to teach away from a single port inline mixer, as said mixer appears to have multiple ports (Figure 13; Paragraphs [0079]-[0081]; see openings 176, 178 and 184). The amendment to Claim 14 is therefore considered new matter and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a). See also that the new matter issue raises additional indefiniteness issues requiring grounds of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), as detailed below.
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 14-20 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. As discussed above, Claim 14 has been amended to further recite a “single port inline mixer”; however, the amendment is considered new matter for the reasons detailed above. Since the specification, drawings or claims as originally filed do not disclose such a single port inline mixer, the limitation is also considered indefinite because the claim language is unclear what may be considered a single port inline mixer to read on the claims. For instance, since the mixer is an inline mixer, is the single port an input port for the mixing of two components? Is the single port both an inlet and an outlet? Is it a single port for just one inlet or is a single port for just one outlet? Without proper description of the single port inline mixer within the disclosure, the limitation is unclear. For purposes of this examination, the examiner will assume “single port” may just mean a single outlet or inlet to read on the claim.
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 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 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fantappie et al. (US Pat Pub. 2022/0024748, found in IDS filed 11/12/2024) in view of Ibsies, US Pat Pub. 2012/0103926 (found in IDS filed 11/12/2024).
Regarding instant Claim 1, Fantappie discloses a fluid modifier and dispensing system (Abstract; Figure 1; beverage dispenser with blending capabilities) comprising:
a fluid modifying assembly (Figure 1; Figure 3; Figure 3A; Figure 11; Paragraph [0035]; Paragraph [0097]; housing 100 comprises fluid modification elements such as concentrate bottles 701) comprising:
a fluid modification unit (Figure 1; Figure 3; Figure 3A; Figure 11; Paragraph [0097]; housing 100) comprising:
a gas dosing unit configured to infuse a fluid with a gas (Figure 7A; Figure 7B; Paragraph [0049]; gas source 401 connected to chilled water line 404);
a filter configured to filter the fluid (Figure 3A; Figure 10B; Paragraph [0071]; filter 203); and
a pH regulator configured to modify a pH of the fluid (Figure 3A; Figure 10B; Paragraph [0071]; alkaline functional group 600 and related parts used to raise pH to preferred levels);
a temperature regulation system coupled to the fluid modification unit, wherein the temperature regulation system is configured to modify a temperature of the fluid (Figure 11; Paragraph [0037]; Paragraph [0042]; Paragraph [0064]; cooling functional group 300 and heating functional group 500, and associated parts with each); and
a dosing system coupled to the fluid modification unit, wherein the dosing system is configured to add a customizable amount of one or more supplements to the fluid (Abstract; Figure 10A; Figure 10B; Figure 11; Paragraph [0037]; Paragraph [0073]; flavoring and enhancement functional group 700; see that customizable amounts of additive can be made to deliver beverage of user’s choice); and
a fluid dispensing assembly (Figure 2; Paragraph [0034]; nozzle 210 for dispensing) comprising:
a faucet coupled to the fluid modifying assembly (Figure 2; Paragraph [0034]; nozzle 210); and
a vessel comprising a lid and a base (Figure 2; Paragraph [0034]; container 2 having a lid with associated cap and base at bottom of bottle).
However, Fantappie is silent on the base of the vessel being configured to couple directly to the faucet to fill the vessel with the fluid.
Ibsies discloses a sports bottle and fluid dispensing system, device and method in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, as it solves the mutual problem of dispensing fluid into a vessel (Abstract). Ibsies further discloses a base of a vessel being configured to couple directly to a faucet in order to fill the vessel with fluid in a region of the vessel that is not the main opening/top for spatial convenience (Abstract; Figure 6; Figure 11; Paragraphs [0002]-[0004]; Paragraph [0050]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the base of the vessel and faucet of Fantappie to be configured to couple directly to the faucet to fill the vessel as taught by Ibsies because Ibsies discloses such a configuration allows a user to fill the vessel with fluid in a region of the vessel that is not the main opening/top for spatial convenience (Ibsies, Abstract; Paragraphs [0002]-[0004]).
Regarding instant Claim 2, Claim 1, upon which Claim 2 is dependent, has been rejected above. The combined references further disclose wherein the fluid modifying assembly is configured to be placed under a sink (Fantappie, Figure 2; Paragraph [0033]; housing 100 may be sized for placement in non-typical places such as under a sink).
Regarding instant Claim 3, Claim 1, upon which Claim 3 is dependent, has been rejected above. The combined references further disclose wherein the gas dosing unit is configured to infuse at least CO2 into the fluid (Paragraph [0033]; Paragraph [0049]; at least CO2 is infused in the liquid).
Regarding instant Claim 4, Claim 1, upon which Claim 4 is dependent, has been rejected above. The combined references further disclose an in-line mixer configured to mix the one or more supplements within the fluid (Paragraph [0081]; concentrate pump blends concentrate and alkaline water together).
Regarding instant Claim 5, Claim 1, upon which Claim 5 is dependent, has been rejected above. The combined references further disclose wherein the dosing system comprises a dosing reservoir comprising a plurality of compartments, each compartment configured to store a different supplement, and also comprises a plurality of rotating dosers, each rotating doser configured to dispense a supplement of a compartment of the plurality of compartments (Figure 3; Figure 3A; Figure 11; Paragraph [0035]; Paragraph [0073]; Paragraph [0074]; Paragraph [0076]; Paragraph [0077]; Paragraph [0087]; concentrate containers 701 and associated rotatable threads for openings 705 for dosing).
Claims 6 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ibsies, US Pat Pub. 2012/0103926 (found in IDS filed 11/12/2024) in view of Clusserath, US Pat Pub. 2010/0108180).
Regarding instant Claim 6, Ibsies discloses a fluid modifying and dispensing system (Abstract; Figure 6; Figure 11; Paragraph [0050]; sports bottle 10 with dispensing machine including sanitary filter 1105 for modification of liquid via filtration) comprising:
a fluid modifying assembly (Figure 6; Figure 11; Paragraph [0050]; sanitary filter 1105);
a fluid dispensing assembly coupled to the fluid modifying assembly (Figure 6; Figure 11; Paragraph [0050]; infill port 30 coupled to the sanitary filter 1105 and dispensing machine, infill port connected to bottle 10), the fluid dispensing assembly comprising:
a faucet coupled to the fluid modifying assembly (Figure 6; Figure 11; Paragraph [0050]; infill port 30 which includes ball valve or the like); and
a vessel comprising a lid and a base (Figure 6; Figure 11; Paragraph [0026]; Paragraph [0050]; bottle 10; lid in cap 20; base in bottom wall 14);
wherein the base of the vessel is configured to couple directly to the faucet to fill the vessel with the fluid through the base of the vessel (Figure 6; Figure 11; Paragraph [0026]; Paragraph [0033]; Paragraph [0050]; liquid enters bottle 12 through inlet port 30 and associated valves, which can be placed at the bottom [see Figure 6]; see also that Figure 11 integrates as with other embodiments).
However, the reference is silent on wherein the lid stays locked until a pressure release valve in the base releases the pressure inside the vessel.
Clusserath discloses a method of treating a beverage bottle filing machine in a beverage bottle plant in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, as it solves the mutual problem of filling beverage bottles (Abstract). Clusserath further discloses the locking of a lid of a bottle until a pressure release valve is released in order to ensure the proper filling of the bottle (Paragraph [0003]; Paragraph [0043]; Paragraph [0067]; see valve 13 and gas lock 10, along with controlled fluid pressure).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing of the invention to modify the base and lid of Ibsies to further comprise wherein the lid stays locked until a pressure release valve in the base releases the pressure inside the vessel as taught by Clusserath because Clusserath ensures proper filling and sealing of the beverage bottle (Abstract; Paragraph [0003]; Paragraph [0043]).
Regarding instant Claim 8, Claim 6, upon which Claim 8 is dependent, has been rejected above. Ibsies further discloses wherein the faucet comprises one or more locking mechanisms configured to secure the vessel to the faucet (Figure 3; Figure 11; Paragraph [0026]; Paragraph [0037]; Paragraph [0050]; locking mechanisms such as seal 24 ensure valve/port 30 has fluid tight connection with bottle 12; see also that embodiment of Figure 11 is integrated with features from other embodiments).
Regarding instant Claim 9, Claim 6, upon which Claim 9 is dependent, has been rejected above. Ibsies further discloses wherein the faucet is activated when the base of the vessel is coupled directly to the faucet (Figure 6; Figure 11; Paragraph [0026]; Paragraph [0050]; diaphragm valve would operate as coupled to the base of vessel).
Regarding instant Claim 10, Claim 6, upon which Claim 10 is dependent, has been rejected above. Ibsies further discloses wherein the vessel comprises an RFID integrated circuit, wherein the fluid modifying and dispensing system is configured to recognize the RFID integrated circuit before filling the vessel with the fluid (Abstract; Figure 11; Paragraph [0008]; Paragraph [0028]; Paragraph [0039]; Paragraph [0042]; Paragraph [0045]; Paragraph [0050]; bottle 10 comprises RFID tag, allowing modifying and dispensing system to identify the bottle before initiating fill sequence).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ibsies, US Pat Pub. 2012/0103926 (found in IDS filed 11/12/2024) in view of Clusserath, US Pat Pub. 2010/0108180) as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Seaborne et al. (herein referred to as “Seaborne”, US Pat Pub. 2010/0230007; found in IDS filed 11/12/2024).
Regarding instant Claim 7, Claim 6, upon which Claim 7 is dependent, has been rejected above. However, Ibsies is silent on a retractable injector configured to fill the vessel when in a deployed position.
Seaborne discloses a liquid dispensing system in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, as it solves the mutual problem of dispensing liquid into a container (Abstract). Seaborne further discloses a retractable injector configured to fill the vessel when in a deployed position, wherein the retraction seals the injector from the outside environment when not in use (Abstract; Figure 1; Paragraph [0003]; see sealing of the opening after retraction of said nozzle).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the faucet of Ibsies to further comprise a retractable injector as taught by Seaborne because Seaborne discloses such a retractable injector seals the injector from the outside environment when not in use (Seaborne, Paragraph [0003]).
Claims 11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ibsies, US Pat Pub. 2012/0103926 (found in IDS filed 11/12/2024) in view of Clusserath, US Pat Pub. 2010/0108180) as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Puderbaugh et al. (herein referred to as “Puderbaugh”, US 4013076; found in IDS filed 11/12/2024).
Regarding instant Claim 11, Claim 6, upon which Claim 11 is dependent, has been rejected above. While Ibsies discloses a discharge port for effluent air (Figure 11; Paragraph [0050]; port 1107), the reference is silent on the lid of the vessel comprising a float valve configured to allow air to escape when filling the vessel and to prevent the vessel from being overfilled by closing when the fluid engages the float valve.
Puderbaugh discloses an aspirator jar in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, as it solves the mutual problem of providing containers for the collection of liquids (Abstract). Puderbaugh further discloses a lid comprising a float valve configured to allow air to escape when filling the vessel and to prevent the vessel from being overfilled by closing when the fluid engages the float valve in order to ensure a proper level of air and liquid within the vessel (Abstract; Figure 1; Figure 3; Col. 4, Lines 8-16; lid 16; valve support post 52 with overflow valve functionality).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the lid of Ibsies to further comprise the float valve as taught by Puderbaugh because Puderbaugh discloses such a float valve ensures proper levels of air and liquid within the vessel (Puderbaugh, Abstract; Figure 1; Figure 3; Col. 4, Lines 8-16).
Regarding instant Claim 13, Claim 6, upon which Claim 13 is dependent, has been rejected above. While Ibsies discloses a discharge port for effluent air (Figure 11; Paragraph [0050]; port 1107), the reference is silent on a safety pressure management valve configured to open and release pressure when an internal pressure exceeds 80 psi.
Puderbaugh discloses an aspirator jar in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, as it solves the mutual problem of providing containers for the collection of liquids (Abstract). Puderbaugh further discloses a lid comprising a safety pressure management valve configured to open and release pressure in order to ensure a proper level of air and liquid within the vessel (Abstract; Figure 1; Figure 3; Col. 4, Lines 8-16; lid 16; valve support post 52 with overflow valve functionality).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the lid of Ibsies to further comprise the safety management valve as taught by Puderbaugh because Puderbaugh discloses such a safety management valve ensures proper levels of air and liquid within the vessel (Puderbaugh, Abstract; Figure 1; Figure 3; Col. 4, Lines 8-16).
While the references do not disclose an 80 psi threshold for the safety pressure management valve, it would be obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to arrive at such an internal pressure of the vessel before the use of the safety pressure management valve as an optimized variable via routine experimentation. Excessive pressure within a vessel would be dangerous, especially in the practice of dispensing fluids into such a vessel, so it would be obvious to optimize the internal pressure of the vessel at a level such as 80 psi considered appropriate by the designer in order that the vessel and associated equipment can be handled safely. See MPEP 2144.05, II. A. for more detail.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ibsies, US Pat Pub. 2012/0103926 (found in IDS filed 11/12/2024) in view of Clusserath, US Pat Pub. 2010/0108180) as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Wolf, US 4237593.
Regarding instant Claim 12, Claim 6, upon which Claim 12 is dependent, has been rejected above. While Ibsies discloses a discharge port for effluent air (Figure 11; Paragraph [0050]; port 1107), the reference is silent on the lid of the vessel comprising a pressure relief valve.
Wolf discloses a method of making a two-part pressure relief valve in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, as it solves the mutual problem of handling pressure within a container (Abstract). Wolf further discloses a lid comprising a pressure relief valve configured to be activated by a level, wherein the lever is also configured to lock and unlock the lid to a remainder of the vessel in order to ensure proper pressure levels are contained within the container (Abstract; Figure 1; Figure 2; Col. 10, Lines 2-6; valve body 5 and lever system within valve seat 2, wherein the housing walls 10 may be considered the lid).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art on the effective filing date of the invention to modify the lid of Ibsies to further comprise the pressure relief valve and lever of Wolf because Wolf discloses such features ensure proper pressure levels are contained within the container (Wolf, Abstract; Figure 1; Figure 2; Col. 10, Lines 2-6).
Claims 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fantappie et al. (US Pat Pub. 2022/0024748, found in IDS filed 11/12/2024) in view of Peirsman et al. (herein referred to as “Peirsman”, US Pat Pub. 2016/0318746).
Regarding instant Claim 14, Fantappie discloses a fluid modifying assembly (Figure 1; Figure 3; Figure 3A; Figure 11; Paragraph [0035]; Paragraph [0097]; housing 100 comprises fluid modification elements such as concentrate bottles 701) comprising:
a fluid modification unit (Figure 1; Figure 3; Figure 3A; Figure 11; Paragraph [0097]; housing 100) comprising:
a gas dosing unit configured to infuse a fluid with a gas (Figure 7A; Figure 7B; Paragraph [0049]; gas source 401 connected to chilled water line 404);
a filter configured to filter the fluid (Figure 3A; Figure 10B; Paragraph [0071]; filter 203); and
a pH regulator configured to modify a pH of the fluid (Figure 3A; Figure 10B; Paragraph [0071]; alkaline functional group 600 and related parts used to raise pH to preferred levels);
a temperature regulation system coupled to the fluid modification unit, wherein the temperature regulation system is configured to modify a temperature of the fluid and associated parts with each); and
a dosing system coupled to the fluid modification unit (Figure 10A; Figure 10B; Figure 11; Paragraph [0037]; Paragraph [0073]; flavoring and enhancement functional group 700); the dosing system comprising:
a dosing reservoir configured to store one or more supplements (Figure 3; Figure 3A; Figure 11; Paragraph [0035]; Paragraph [0073]; Paragraph [0074]; Paragraph [0076]; Paragraph [0077]; Paragraph [0087]; concentrate containers 701 comprising plurality of concentrates/additives);
a dosing unit configured to add one or more supplements to the fluid (Figure 3; Figure 3A; Figure 10B; Figure 11; Paragraph [0035]; Paragraph [0073]; Paragraph [0074]; Paragraph [0076]; Paragraph [0077]; Paragraph [0080]; Paragraph [0087]; pumps 703 serve as dosing unit for respective container 701); and
an inline mixer configured to mix the one or more supplements with the fluid (Figure 10B; Paragraph [0081]; nozzle 210).
However, the reference is silent on a single port inline mixer.
Peirsman discloses a beverage dispenser and method for mixing one or more beverage components with at least one carbonated liquid in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, as it solves the mutual problem of dispensing a beverage (Abstract). Peirsman discloses a mixer with a single port that allows for mixing to a user’s choice (Figure 1; Figure 2; Paragraph [0003]; Paragraphs [0095]-[0099]; chamber wherein jet streams 23/24 from discharge ends 21 and 22 comprises outlet 26).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the inline mixer of Fantappie to further comprise a single port inline mixer as taught by Peirsman because Peirsman discloses such a mixer with a single port allows for mixing to a user’s choice (Peirsman, Paragraph [0003]; Paragraphs [0095]-[0099]).
Regarding instant Claim 15, Claim 14, upon which Claim 15 is dependent, has been rejected above. Fantappie further discloses wherein the dosing reservoir is removably coupled to the dosing unit (Figure 10C; Paragraph [0077]; concentrate containers use threaded connections).
Regarding instant Claim 16, Claim 14, upon which Claim 16 is dependent, has been rejected above. Fantappie further discloses wherein the inline mixer is housed within a dosing receiver, wherein the dosing receiver is configured to directly couple to and within the fluid modification unit (Figure 3; Figure 10B; Paragraph [0034]; Paragraph [0044]; Paragraph [0081]; after drip valve 212 serves as dosing receiver that is fluidly connected to nozzle 210).
Regarding instant Claim 17, Claim 14, upon which Claim 17 is dependent, has been rejected above. Fantappie discloses wherein the dosing unit further includes two or more dosers (Figure 5A; Paragraph [0035]; Paragraph [0076]; reference discloses at least six containers 701).
Regarding instant Claim 18, Claim 14, upon which Claim 18 is dependent, has been rejected above. Fantappie further discloses wherein the dosing reservoir includes a plurality of compartments configured to hold a plurality of supplements (Figure 5A; Paragraph [0035]; Paragraph [0076]; at least six containers 701 for plurality of supplements).
Regarding instant Claim 19, Claim 17, upon which Claim 19 is dependent, has been rejected above. Fantappie further discloses wherein the two or more dosers are each rotatable (Figure 3; Figure 3A; Figure 11; Paragraph [0035]; Paragraph [0073]; Paragraph [0074]; Paragraph [0076]; Paragraph [0077]; Paragraph [0087]; concentrate containers 701 and associated rotatable threads for openings 705 for dosing).
Regarding instant Claim 20, Claim 14, upon which Claim 20 is dependent, has been rejected above. Fantappie further discloses wherein the temperature regulation system is directly coupled to the fluid modification unit (Figure 5A; Paragraph [0040]; chiller 310 at least is directly coupled to fluid modification units as 710 as seen in Figure 5A).
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 RICHARD C GURTOWSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-3189. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am-5:30pm MT.
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, Benjamin Lebron can be reached at (571) 272-0475. 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.
/RICHARD C GURTOWSKI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1773 02/10/2026