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 .
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, the “apparatus of claim 1 wherein the lid is a separate component from the housing” 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 Objections
Claim 8 objected to because of the following informality: it includes reference to “a breast milk receptacle”. The breast milk receptacle is introduced in claim 1. To maintain antecedent basis, “a breast milk receptacle” should be changed to “the breast milk receptacle”.
Claim 9 objected to because of the following informality: Claim 9 should read "The apparatus of claim 1 further comprising a removable partition between the first reservoir and second reservoir".
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Regarding the limitations directed to cooling or heating liquid, applicant should note the examiner will not import limitations from the specifications into the claims. All the claims require are the reservoirs and the reservoirs by themselves only need to be capable of working at the claimed temperatures. “Reservoirs” is not a nonce term and therefore, the required cooling and heating structure to complete the claimed functions will not be imported.
Also, as claim 10’s “insulating” has not been defined in the specifications, the examiner will interpret the “insulating material” as being any material.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Bentley et al. (US 2015/0068403 A1)’s third embodiment, hereinafter “Bentley”.
Regarding claim 1, Bentley teaches a housing (210, 220, and 280) with a lid (222).
Further, Bentley teaches a first reservoir (280) configured to receive and cool a liquid (“The auxiliary module station 300 is used to mount auxiliary modules in parallel to the first and second water tanks rather than in line with the tanks” paragraph 104; “the auxiliary module 300 may be any of a chilling module, a pre-heating module, a water filtration unit, disinfection module, a telemetry device or similar as described above” paragraph 106).
Bentley teaches a second reservoir (220) contained within the housing and configured to store a liquid at a storage temperature. The second reservoir would also be chilled by the auxiliary module station 300 as described above.
Bentley teaches a third reservoir (250, 230, 225). The third reservoir is configured to warm and dispense a liquid and is in fluid communication with the second reservoir (220) (“the first water tank 220 is used to provide water for hot drinks and the water passes through the water heater 225 on the way to the cartridge head 250” paragraph 94; “The water pump 230 is a volumetric displacement pump that creates sufficient suction head to draw water from the tanks through the heater and the dispensing valve 250” paragraph 89). Figure 1 shows that the third reservoir (250, 230, 225) is located above the dispensing station (270) where the receptacle is placed.
Regarding claim 2, Bentley’s Figure 1 (shown below) shows that the third reservoir (250, 230, 225) is located at an exterior portion of the housing.
PNG
media_image1.png
330
508
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12, Bentley teaches “The tank comprises an open upper end forming an inlet for filling the tank with water which is closed off in use by a manually removable lid 222.” (paragraph 84) which anticipates claim 12’s “wherein the lid is a separate component from the housing”.
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 3, 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bentley in view of "The Home Depot".
Regarding claim 3, Bentley teaches a first reservoir (280) configured to receive and cool a liquid (“The auxiliary module station 300 is used to mount auxiliary modules in parallel to the first and second water tanks rather than in line with the tanks” paragraph 104; “the auxiliary module 300 may be any of a chilling module, a pre-heating module, a water filtration unit, disinfection module, a telemetry device or similar as described above” paragraph 106). Bentley also teaches the first reservoir “may contain aqueous medium at an absolute temperature of between 4 and 15 degrees Celsius depending on the local ambient temperature level” (paragraph 18). Bentley teaches the first reservoir being cooled to 4-15°C (39-59°F) instead of to 35-40°F. “The Home Depot” describes refrigeration temperature as “The ideal refrigerator temperature is 40 degrees Fahrenheit or below in the main part of the fridge. The optimal temperature for keeping foods cold is 37 degrees Fahrenheit.” “The Home Depot” also provides a reason: “A cold fridge prevents the growth of bacteria that can make you sick.” Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to cool/maintain the liquid at a temperature between 35-40 as “The Home Depot” has taught that this range inhibits bacterial growth.
Similarly, in regards to claim 4, Bentley teaches a second reservoir (220) cooled by an auxiliary module (“The auxiliary module station 300 is used to mount auxiliary modules in parallel to the first and second water tanks rather than in line with the tanks” paragraph 104; “the auxiliary module 300 may be any of a chilling module, a pre-heating module, a water filtration unit, disinfection module, a telemetry device or similar as described above” paragraph 106). However, Bentley does not teach the second reservoir cooled to 35-38°F. “The Home Depot” describes refrigeration temperature as “The ideal refrigerator temperature is 40 degrees Fahrenheit or below in the main part of the fridge. The optimal temperature for keeping foods cold is 37 degrees Fahrenheit.” “The Home Depot” also provides a reason: “A cold fridge prevents the growth of bacteria that can make you sick.” Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to cool/maintain the liquid at a temperature between 35-38 as “The Home Depot” has taught that this range inhibits bacterial growth.
Claims 5, 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bentley in view of Clark.
Regarding claim 5, Bentley teaches the third reservoir being smaller than both the first and second reservoir. Bentley teaches that the second reservoir “has an internal capacity 1.5 litres” paragraph 83). Bentley teaches “the construction and materials of the second water tank 280 are preferable the same as those of the first water tank 220” (paragraph 86). Therefore, both the first and second reservoir are taught to contain up to 1.5 liters of fluid. The third reservoir (250, 230, 225) “comprises a cartridge holder for holding, in use, the beverage cartridge” (paragraph 79). According to Clark, the standard sizes for beverage cartridges are 4, 6, 8, 10, or 12 oz. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further modify Bentley such that the reservoir is e.g. 4 ounces as it is taught by Clark that this is a standard size in the art and thus the use of such would have yielded only a predictable result and had the advantage of interoperability with standard size cartridges. All of the standard cartridge sizes as taught by Clark are less than 1.5 liters, therefore the third reservoir would be smaller than the first and second reservoirs.
Regarding claim 6, the modified device of Bentley includes beverage cartridges of a standard size which could be 4, 6, 8, 10, or 12 oz. It would thus be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to choose from the finite number of beverage cartridge sizes and could pursue the known solutions with a reasonable expectation of success and make the third reservoir contain up to 10 oz of fluid.
Claims 7, 8, 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bentley in view of Kutcher et al. (US 9486103B2), hereinafter "Kutcher".
Regarding claim 7, Bentley teaches a third reservoir (250, 230, 225). However, Bentley does not teach a funnel in fluid communication with the third reservoir.
Kutcher teaches a funnel (116) in fluid connection with a reservoir (712) with a heating element (726) (“Also, a heating element 726 and a temperature sensor 718 (e.g., a thermocouple) are disposed within the water tank 712” column 5 lines 16-18; “In this example, a spout 410 is disposed in a side of the funnel 116 for releasing heated water into the bottle 140.” Column 4 lines 59-61). Kutcher teaches that the funnel is useful for “guiding powder and/or water into the bottle 140.” (column 4 lines 43-44).
It would thus have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to add the funnel of Kutcher to the third reservoir of Bentley to guide the liquid into the breast milk receptacle.
Regarding claim 8, the modified device of Bentley teaches a funnel in fluid communication with the third reservoir. It does not teach that “the funnel at its bottom portion is less than the circumference of the breast milk receptacle.”
Kutcher teaches that “the funnel has a bottom circumference that is approximately the same as, or slightly smaller than the circumference of the top of the bottle” (column 2 lines 40-41).
The circumference of the funnel may be larger, smaller, or the same size as the opening of the receptacle. Therefore, there are a finite number of options for sizing the funnel which an inventor could have pursued with a reasonable expectation of success. It would thus have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to make the funnel have a smaller circumference than the receptacle to prevent spillage.
Regarding claim 11, Bentley discloses “The tank comprises an open upper end forming an inlet for filling the tank with water which is closed off in use by a manually removable lid 222.” (paragraph 84). Bentley does not disclose the lid being connected to the housing via a hinge.
Kutcher discloses “a cover 112 is provided at the top of the apparatus 100 and opens and closes on a hinge 210 (see FIG. 2)” (column 4 lines 33-35).
Both a removable lid and a lid attached to the housing by a hinge were known in the art by the effective filing date of the invention. It would thus have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to replace the removable lid of Bentley with the hinged lid of Kutcher.
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bentley in view of Grandi (US 6637320 B2).
In regards to claim 9, Bentley teaches a first reservoir (280) and a second reservoir (220). However, Bentley does not teach a removable partition between the first and second reservoir.
An alternate embodiment of Bentley teaches “a single water tank 290 of double capacity which is located on both the first and second water tank stations.” (paragraph 97). Grandi teaches “a chamber (1) divided into two zones (11, 12) for preservation at different temperature, separated by a vertical mobile thermal barrier (10), capable of sliding horizontally and enabling said zones (11, 12) to exhibit modifiable dimensions as required” (abstract). Grandi teaches that the removable partition (Grandi’s 10) “unlocking allows the thermal barrier to be completely removed together with the resistance elements 16 used to reheat one of the regions 11, 12, the whole assembly constituting a removable rack. This being important in order for the device to be thoroughly cleaned” (Column 2 lines 56-60).
It would thus be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art by the effective filing date of the invention to replace the two reservoirs of Bentley with the single reservoir of Bentley’s alternative embodiment and equipped Grandi’s removable partition to allow for thorough cleaning of the device.
Regarding claim 10, the modified device of Bentley imports the limitations of claim 9 as described above including the removable partition of Grandi. Grandi describes Grandi’s 10 as a “heat barrier” (column 2 line 38). “Heat barrier” implies that the removable partition includes an insulating material.
It would thus have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to make the removable partition of the modified device of Bentley include an insulating material.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ren et al. Morse (US 806697) teaches a series of tanks held at different temperatures for the purpose of pasteurizing milk. Bauer et al. (US 10136759 B2) teaches a device that can cool and heat breast milk. McCarty et al. (US 2014/0242213 A1) teaches a baby bottle with an integrated heater attached to a pump which adds milk from a container. Anthony et al. (US 2015/0359378 A1) teaches a series of reservoirs with a heater that can dispense a beverage. Ward (US 0210277) teaches three reservoirs with dispensers configured to maintain milk at a cool temperature. Koo (US 2016/0083238 A1) discloses a refrigerator which is capable of dispensing body temperature water. Sala et al. (US 8511221 B2) discloses a coffee and hot chocolate machine which contains a first reservoir (28) containing milk which is connected to a second reservoir (30) which may contain a non-return valve to prevent bacterial contamination in the first reservoir. Milk is then transferred to a third reservoir (17) which may be configured to heat the milk and dispenses into a cup. Hyun et al. (US 2016/0030292 A1) teaches a chilled container which feeds milk to a neonatal infant. The device heats the milk before it enters the infant.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARGARET H. CLARKE whose telephone number is (571)270-5718. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday/Friday 7:30-5:00.
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, Edward Landrum can be reached at (571) 272-5567. 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.
/M.H.C./ Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/WOODY A LEE JR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights