DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Prosecutorial Standing
Election/Restrictions
2. Claims 10-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group 2, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 01.05.2026.
3. Applicant’s election without traverse of Group 1 (which corresponds to claims 1-9) in the reply filed on 01.05.2026 is acknowledged. Claims 1-9 will be subject to further examination and evaluation in due course, and will be presented for examination, as detailed below.
Oath/Declaration
4. The Applicants’ oath/declaration has been reviewed by the Examiner and is found to conform to the requirements prescribed in 37 C.F.R. 1.63.
Information Disclosure Statement
5. As required by M.P.E.P. 609(C), the Applicant' s submission of the Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) dated 08.21.2023 is acknowledged by the Examiner. The cited references have been considered in the examination of the claims. As required by M.P.E.P 609 C (2), a copy of the PTOL-1449 initialed, signed and dated by the Examiner is attached to the instant Office action.
Priority / Filing Date
6. No priority date has been claimed for this application. Accordingly, the Examiner will rely on the actual filling or 371(c) date of 05.31.2023, for purposes of prosecution.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
8. 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.
9. Claims 1 and 9 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.
Claims 1 and 9 recite the limitation “a selected target alcohol strength (“% ABV Target”), and an alcohol supply (“% ABV Target)”. The meaning of ABV is not set forth in the claim, and it is unclear what “% ABV” represents. Applicant is required to give a thorough explanation regarding the plethora of “acronym” in the claims since “acronym” must be defined. For purpose of examination Applicants need to define the following acronyms: ““% ABV” in the body of the claims.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
10. 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.
11. 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.
12. Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gibney et al., Patent No.: US 5,537,914 in view of Rudick et al., Patent No.: US 9,821,992.
As per claims 1 and 9, Gibney discloses a computer-implemented method for determining required volumetric mass flow of blended beverage ingredients for a continuous blend system associated with a high-speed filling machine [see at least the abstract (e.g., a beverage blending system. The apparatus and the associated method are adaptable to existing proportioning and blending systems or the appropriate control and measurement equipment may be installed alone to provide a highly accurate control of the blend. This control is a function of the mass flow of at least one of the components input to the proportioner. From this mass flow determination an adjusted volumetric flow value for the component(s) is determined. The ratio of the volumetric flow of the water to the syrup is used to determine a signal to control the proportional blending)]:
FIG. 1 shows a typical carbonated beverage blending and proportioning system including a downstream system analyzer.
PNG
media_image1.png
366
530
media_image1.png
Greyscale
comprising: receiving input regarding a production fill of a blended beverage for a high-speed filling machine including a selected blended beverage having a required syrup/water ratio [see at least the abstract (e.g., control is a function of the mass flow of at least one of the components input to the proportioner), and column 1: lines 56-62 (e.g., present invention preferably includes Coriolis mass flow meters within both the syrup input line and the water input line within a blending system. The volumetric flow of the syrup (and preferably also for the water input) is determined from the mass flow reading of the Coriolis mass flow meter(s))], a selected target strength (“% ABV Target”), a strength of an alcohol supply (“% ABV Supply”) [see at least column 9: lines 27-31 (e.g., blending of a particular beverage is typically determined as a function of its target drink number. This target drink number is the proper brix value for the sugar in the blended beverage as set by the beverage recipe owner)], a type of container [(see at least column 4: lines 20-25 (e.g., container filling apparatus (not shown))], and a selected container filling rate [as illsuatted in FIG. 2 (e.g., proportioner 50 by pump 86 to control the overall flow rate)];
calculating a required volumetric mass flow of blended beverage ingredients for the production fill [see at least the abstract (e.g., mass flow determination an adjusted volumetric flow value)];
calculating a required volumetric mass flow of the alcohol supply for the production fill [see at least ¶ bridging columns 3 and 4 (e.g., a flow meter 54 to determine the mass flow rate), and see FIG. 2 below];
calculating a required blended syrup and water volumetric mass flow of a proportioner for the production fill [(e.g., proportioner 50)]; calculating a required syrup volumetric mass flow of a syrup supply to the proportioner for the production fill [(e.g., syrup tank 62)];
calculating a volumetric mass flow of water in the required volumetric mass flow of the alcohol supply [(e.g., water storage tank 56)]; and
calculating a required water volumetric mass flow of a water supply to the proportioner for the production fill accounting for the calculated volumetric mass flow of water in the required volumetric mass flow of the alcohol supply [(see at least column 5: lines 17-27 (e.g., proportioning and blending system is required at different times to produce many different types of beverages under different blending recipes)];
FIG. 2 shows a preferred beverage blending and proportioning apparatus.
PNG
media_image2.png
360
550
media_image2.png
Greyscale
and outputting instructions to a continuous blend [see at least ¶ bridging columns 7 and 8 (e.g., continuously calculate the density of the syrup and the corresponding volumetric flow rate of the syrup via equation)] system associated with the high-speed filling machine [see at least Other Publications (e.g., "The Science of Soft Drink Beverage Stability for High Temperature High Speed Filling", AMBEC advertising brochure (undated)), column 4: lines 50-55 (e.g., variable speed pumps (not shown)). Such a system is shown in Pahl, et al., U.S. Pat. No. 2,728,581. This Pahl, et al., patent is herein incorporated by reference] for activating actuators associated with valves of the alcohol supply, the syrup supply, the water supply, and the proportioner to introduce the corresponding required volumetric mass flow, the required syrup volumetric mass flow, the required water volumetric water flow, and the required blended syrup and water volumetric mass flow into the continuous blend system for supply of the blended beverage to the high-speed filling machine [see at least column 4: lines 7-25 (e.g., valves 64, 66)].
Gibney discloses all elements per claimed invention as explained above. Gibney, further discloses the signals from the flow meters 54, 60 are fed to a controller 68. Signals from the carbonator 84 are also fed into controller 68. Controller 68 in turn sends a signal to electronic actuators 70 and 71. Actuator 71 is used to adjust valve 76 at the outlet 78 of syrup tank 62. Actuator 70 is used to adjust micrometer control valve 72 at the outlet 74 of water storage tank 56. The actuators 70, 71 control the throttling or shut off of the valves 72, 76, respectively, by a rotary motion based upon a remote-control signal from controller 68 [column 4: lines 26-43, and see FIG. 2 above (e.g., block 68)].
Furthermore, Gibney discloses that Controller 68 may operate under any of the following preferred methods (or combinations thereof) for adjusting the proportional blending of a beverage. FIGS. 3, 3A, 3B, 4, 5 and 6 show flow charts for the presently-contemplated preferred methods. As particularly shown in FIG. 3, at start-up, the controller 68 reviews certain controls within the system. First, the controller 68 determines whether or not the mix or lift pumps (not shown) within the system are operating. If the pumps are not operating, the control program will not continue. If the pumps are operating, the controller 68 proceeds to the next step. There is an initial period at start-up where the signals from the flow meters 56, 60 and from other elements in the system may be unstable [¶ bridging columns 4 and 5].
Gibney does not expressly disclose a computing device or a computing system, and alcoholic blende beverage. However, Rudick discloses a computing device or a computing system [see at least column 3: lines 53-60 (e.g., user interface 150 controls all functional aspects of the beverage dispenser 100. The consumer may select and/or create numerous types of beverages and blends using the user interface 150, A conventional control device 160 may support the user interface 150. The control device 160 may be a conventional microcomputer or a similar type of device. The control device 160 may be internal to or remote from the beverage dispenser 100), and FIG. 1 is presented below]; and alcoholic blende beverage [see at least the abstract (e.g., product mixing device includes an ingredient combination chamber and means for agitation positioned about the ingredient combination chamber. The ingredient combination chamber includes a diluent inlet, a number of macro-ingredient inlets, a number of micro-ingredient inlets, and an outlet), and most importantly column 4: lines 12-31 (e.g., micro-ingredients 190 … Various types of alcohols may be used as micro or macro-ingredients)].
FIG. 1 is a schematic view of a beverage dispenser.
PNG
media_image3.png
642
540
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to incorporate the teaching of Rudick in order to provide a product mixing device [Rudick: abstract].
As per claim 2, Gibney discloses wherein the required volumetric mass flow of alcoholic blended beverage ingredients for the production fill is the required volumetric mass flow of alcoholic blended beverage ingredients for supply to the high-speed filling machine for filling a required number of the selected type of containers for the selected container filling rate [see at least the rejection of claim 1 above. Similar rationale is noticed for the combination of Gibney and Rudick, as noted for claim 1 above. In light of the preceding examination, claim 2 is hereby rejected on grounds substantially similar to those articulated in the rejection of claim 1. As detailed in the prior rejection, the rationale and basis for rejecting claim 1 are applicable to claim 2. For a comprehensive understanding of the rejection grounds, reference is made to the detailed explanation provided in the rejection of claim 1, which is incorporated herein by reference].
As per claim 3, Gibney discloses wherein the required alcohol volumetric mass flow for the production fill is calculated by the following equation: REQUIRED ALCOHOL VOLUMETRIC MASS FLOW=(REQUIRED VOLUMETRIC MASS FLOW OF ALCOHOLIC BLENDED BEVERAGE INGREDIENTS/%ABV SUPPLY)*%ABV TARGET) [see at least the rejection of claim 1 above. Similar rationale is noticed for the combination of Gibney and Rudick, as noted for claim 1 above. In light of the preceding examination, claim 3 is hereby rejected on grounds substantially similar to those articulated in the rejection of claim 1. As detailed in the prior rejection, the rationale and basis for rejecting claim 1 are applicable to claim 3. For a comprehensive understanding of the rejection grounds, reference is made to the detailed explanation provided in the rejection of claim 1, which is incorporated herein by reference].
As per claim 4, Gibney discloses wherein the required blended syrup and water volumetric mass flow for the production fill is calculated with the following equation: REQUIRED BLENDED SYRUP AND WATER VOLUMETRIC MASS FLOW=REQUIRED VOLUMETRIC MASS FLOW OF ALCOHOLIC BLENDED BEVERAGE INGREDIENTS−REQUIRED ALCOHOL VOLUMETRIC MASS FLOW [see at least the rejection of claim 1 above. Similar rationale is noticed for the combination of Gibney and Rudick, as noted for claim 1 above. In light of the preceding examination, claim 4 is hereby rejected on grounds substantially similar to those articulated in the rejection of claim 1. As detailed in the prior rejection, the rationale and basis for rejecting claim 1 are applicable to claim 4. For a comprehensive understanding of the rejection grounds, reference is made to the detailed explanation provided in the rejection of claim 1, which is incorporated herein by reference].
As per claim 5, Gibney discloses wherein the required syrup volumetric mass flow is calculated with the following equation: REQUIRED SYRUP VOLUMETRIC MASS FLOW=((REQUIRED BLENDED SYRUP AND WATER VOLUMETRIC MASS FLOW/(SYRUP/WATER RATIO)))+SYRUP DENSITY [see at least the rejection of claim 1 above. Similar rationale is noticed for the combination of Gibney and Rudick, as noted for claim 1 above. In light of the preceding examination, claim 5 is hereby rejected on grounds substantially similar to those articulated in the rejection of claim 1. As detailed in the prior rejection, the rationale and basis for rejecting claim 1 are applicable to claim 5. For a comprehensive understanding of the rejection grounds, reference is made to the detailed explanation provided in the rejection of claim 1, which is incorporated herein by reference].
As per claim 6, Gibney discloses wherein the volumetric mass flow of water in the alcohol supply is calculated with the following equation: VOLUMETRIC MASS FLOW OF WATER IN ALCOHOL SUPPLY=REQUIRED ALCOHOL VOLUMETRIC MASS FLOW*%WATER IN THE ALCOHOL SUPPLY [see at least the rejection of claim 1 above. Similar rationale is noticed for the combination of Gibney and Rudick, as noted for claim 1 above. In light of the preceding examination, claim 6 is hereby rejected on grounds substantially similar to those articulated in the rejection of claim 1. As detailed in the prior rejection, the rationale and basis for rejecting claim 1 are applicable to claim 6. For a comprehensive understanding of the rejection grounds, reference is made to the detailed explanation provided in the rejection of claim 1, which is incorporated herein by reference].
As per claim 7, Gibney discloses wherein the % of water in the alcohol supply is the % ABV Supply subtracted from 100 [see at least the rejection of claim 1 above. Similar rationale is noticed for the combination of Gibney and Rudick, as noted for claim 1 above. In light of the preceding examination, claim 7 is hereby rejected on grounds substantially similar to those articulated in the rejection of claim 1. As detailed in the prior rejection, the rationale and basis for rejecting claim 1 are applicable to claim 7. For a comprehensive understanding of the rejection grounds, reference is made to the detailed explanation provided in the rejection of claim 1, which is incorporated herein by reference].
As per claim 8, Gibney discloses wherein the required water volumetric mass flow is calculated with the following equation: REQUIRED WATER VOLUMETRIC MASS FLOW=(REQUIRED BLENDED SYRUP AND WATER VOLUMETRIC MASS FLOW−REQUIRED SYRUP VOLUMETRIC MASS FLOW)−VOLUMETRIC MASS FLOW OF WATER IN THE ALCOHOL SUPPLY [see at least the rejection of claim 1 above. Similar rationale is noticed for the combination of Gibney and Rudick, as noted for claim 1 above. In light of the preceding examination, claim 8 is hereby rejected on grounds substantially similar to those articulated in the rejection of claim 1. As detailed in the prior rejection, the rationale and basis for rejecting claim 1 are applicable to claim 8. For a comprehensive understanding of the rejection grounds, reference is made to the detailed explanation provided in the rejection of claim 1, which is incorporated herein by reference].
Conclusion
13. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The PTO-1449 have been reviewed and considered.
US 2015/0100252, Gunther: discloses mass flow meters and more particularly relates to systems and methods for determining, among other things, a volumetric flow of a liquid portion of a multiphase fluid flow.
US 11,702,331, Mastro: discloses a beverage dispensing machine that includes a dispensing valve having a first flow path configured to dispense a first fluid and a second flow path configured to dispense a second fluid such that the first fluid and the second fluid mix downstream and form a mixed beverage.
US 5,996,650, Phallen: discloses liquid filling apparatus and method of producing a fill or dose of a defined quantity of liquid based upon the mass of the liquid.
US 8,915,145, Van Orsdol: discloses system and method for calculating the mass flow rate of a fluid stream are presented. The system includes an inlet pipe that receives the fluid stream, a density determination end, a volumetric flow rate determination end, and an outlet pipe.
US 2013/0197828, Paradise: systems and methods for providing highly accurate real-time mass flow measurements.
US 2010/0127015, Boyer: discloses a beverage dispenser with an improved flow proportioning mechanism.
14. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Garcia Ade whose telephone number is (571)272-5586. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday.
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, Florian Zeender can be reached on 517-272-6790. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
15. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Garcia Ade/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627
GARCIA ADE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3687
/GA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627