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 .
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 gearbox assembly that rotates to move an upper platform of the pumping means from a raised position to a lowered position, and then back to the raised position of claim 3 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.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the phrase “the at least one spring” in line 9 is unclear since no spring was previously recited. Examiner suggests removing the word “the” from the cited passage. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Paragraph 0002 refers to an issued U.S. Patent with an incorrect number (“5,9102,698” should read --5,992,698--).
Paragraph 0007, the last sentence, refers to “the at least one spring” without previously describing a spring (see similar objection above regarding the Abstract).
Paragraphs 0022 and 0023, the last sentence of each paragraph, refer to “first outlet tube 36 36”, but should each read --first outlet tube 36--.
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.
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.
Claim 3 is 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 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.
The claimed subject matter “wherein the gearbox assembly rotates to move an upper platform of the pumping means from a raised position to a lowered position, and then back to the raised position, when actuated” is not supported in the original filed specification. The specification describes the gearbox assembly moving the upper platform from a raised position to a lowered position, but states that “spring 50 or springs discussed above assist in the receiver head 44 (and the upper platform 74) being returned back to the raised position” (Paragraph 0032). It does not appear that the specification describes the gearbox assembly moving the upper platform back to the raised position, and the lack of further detail in the specification and drawings raises questions as to the structural relationship of the gearbox assembly with other components of the dispenser that would enable such a function (e.g., it is unclear if the gearbox assembly disengages from the upper platform to allow it to rise via the spring(s), or if an undisclosed motor is involved in moving the upper platform).
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 1-6 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.
Regarding claim 1:
The claim recites “the container having a base, and a sidewall that extends upwardly to a neck that defines a top opening, which together form a liquid storage compartment for storing the liquid” in lines 3-5. It is unclear to what features the underlined term refers.
The claim recites “the pump head of the container” in line 15. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, as the pump head previously recited appears to be a component of the pump dispenser rather than the container.
The claim recites “the at least one spring” in line 16. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 3:
The claim recites “wherein the gearbox assembly rotates to move an upper platform of the pumping means from a raised position to a lowered position, and then back to the raised position, when actuated” in lines 4-6. As described above in the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(a), it is unclear how the gearbox assembly as claimed performs these functions (e.g., it is unclear whether the claim requires the gearbox assembly to complete the raising and lowering of the platform in a single rotation action, or if it may stop and change direction).
The claim recites “the top of the pump head of the container” in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, as a top of the pump head was not previously recited (see also the rejection of claim 1 above regarding the reference to the container instead of the pump dispenser).
The claim recites “the liquid product” in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if the claim is referring to the “liquid” recited in claim 1.
Regarding claim 5, the claim recites “the type of liquid product” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 6:
The claim recites “the container having a base, and a sidewall that extends upwardly to a neck that defines a top opening, which together form a liquid storage compartment for storing the liquid” in lines 3-5. It is unclear to what features the underlined term refers.
The claim recites “a pump head that moved between a raised position and a lowered position” in lines 8-9. It is unclear whether the claim is requiring the pump head to be in a lowered position, or if the claim is intended to match the similar language in claim 1 (i.e., “a pump head that moves”).
The claim recites “the outlet tube having a top end attached to the receiver head, and a bottom end” in lines 12-13. It is unclear whether Applicant intends to refer to the outlet tube recited in line 10 as part of the pump dispenser. The specification describes a “first outlet tube” and a “second outlet tube” (see Paragraphs 0022-0024). Only the second outlet tube is described as having a top end and a bottom end (see Paragraph 0024), but the second outlet tube is not described as part of the pump dispenser, as is required by the instant claim. The claim will be interpreted according to Examiner’s best understanding.
The claim recites “the pump head of the container” in line 18. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, as the pump head previously recited appears to be a component of the pump dispenser rather than the container.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Celest (US 4,967,935).
Regarding claim 1, Celest discloses a dispenser (10, Figs. 1-2) for dispensing a liquid (Col. 1, lines 51-53), the dispenser comprising:
a housing case (12 with 14) that defines a storage chamber (19);
a container (20) inserted into the storage chamber of the housing case (Col. 2, lines 65-66), the container having a base, and a sidewall (20 is a bottle; Col. 3, lines 17-18; see Figs. 3-4) that extends upwardly to a neck (21) that defines a top opening, which together form a liquid storage compartment for storing the liquid (Col. 2, lines 67-68);
a pump dispenser (22) mounted on the neck of the container (Col. 3, lines 3-4), covering the top opening (Fig. 4), for pumping the liquid out of the container, the pump dispenser having a tube (23) that extends downwardly into the liquid storage compartment of the container (Col. 3, lines 4-6), and a pump head (24) that moves between a raised position and a lowered position (Col. 3, lines 7-8, 15-17) for dispensing the liquid out a first outlet tube (25) that extends laterally to an outlet port (outlet of spout 25; Col. 3, lines 9-11; Fig. 4);
a receiver head (upper end of 28; see Figs. 3 and 5) having an opening adapted to receive the first outlet tube of the pump dispenser (upper end of 28 accepts spout 25; Col. 3, lines 25-28; Fig. 5), the receiver head being operably attached to a second outlet tube (28), the second outlet tube having a top end attached to the receiver head (receiver head is integral with 28), and a bottom end (discharge end 31; Fig. 3; erroneously referenced as 30 in Col. 3, lines 25-28);
a sensing means (16 with 18) for sensing motion beneath the housing case (Fig. 3; Col. 2, lines 58-64); and
a pumping means (32) for pushing the pump head of the container to the lowered position (Col. 3, lines 56-67), against the bias of at least one spring (pump head 24 is spring-loaded; Col. 3, lines 15-17), in response to the sensing means (Col. 3, line 67 - Col. 4, line 1).
Regarding claim 2, Celest further discloses that the sensing means includes a motion sensor (photo-emitter 16 and photoreceiver 18 detect motion via infrared LED; Col. 2, lines 58-64).
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.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Celest in view of Natterer (US 2012/0223098).
Celest discloses the dispenser of claim 1, as described above in the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1). Celest further discloses a motor and cam assembly that is actuated by the sensing means to pump the liquid product out of the container and into the receiver head (32, 34, 35; Col. 3, line 56 - Col. 4, line 1), but does not explicitly disclose a gearbox assembly moving an upper platform.
Natterer teaches a dispenser (100, Fig. 6) having pumping means (102) that includes an assembly housing (body of 102) that houses a gearbox assembly (including 600, 608, 612; Paragraph 0039) that is actuated by a sensing means (sensor 202 generates signal to operate motor; Paragraph 0039); wherein the gearbox assembly rotates to move an upper platform (406 with 407; Paragraph 0031) of the pumping means from a raised position to a lowered position, and then back to the raised position, when actuated (Paragraph 0039); and wherein the upper platform abuts the top of a pump head (404, Figs. 4a-4b), such that the upper platform functions to pump the liquid product out of a container (Paragraph 0039). Natterer further teaches that this configuration can allow adjustment of the amount of liquid dispensed (via adjustment knob 106; Paragraphs 0041-0042).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to provide the dispenser of Celest with an assembly housing, gearbox assembly, and upper platform, as taught by Natterer, as an alternative pumping means to the cam assembly disclosed by Celest. One having ordinary skill in the art would be capable of making such a substitution with predictable results, and would be further motivated to make such a modification in order to enable adjustability of dispensing.
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Celest in view of Wegelin (US 2013/0098941).
Celest discloses the dispenser of claim 1, as described above in the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1). Celest fails to disclose an RFID tag operably mounted in a recess of a bottom surface of the container; or a sensor assembly mounted on a bottom portion of the housing case, having a reader module.
Wegelin teaches a dispenser (200, Figs. 6-12) having a container (280) with an RFID tag (462) operably mounted in a recess (460) of a bottom surface (450) of the container (Fig. 9; Paragraphs 0054-0055); and a sensor assembly (310 with 330, 340, 350; Paragraph 0052) mounted on a bottom portion of a housing case (210, Figs. 6-8), beneath the container once the container has been inserted into a storage chamber of the housing case (Paragraph 0051; Fig. 7). Wegelin further teaches that the RFID tag is read by a reader module (340) of the sensor assembly to determine the type of liquid product within the container when it is within the storage chamber of the housing case (Paragraph 0052). Wegelin teaches that these features allow the dispenser to record and/or display information about the container/product (Paragraph 0059), as well as prevent unauthorized containers from being used in the dispenser (Paragraph 0060).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to provide the dispenser of Celest with an RFID tag in the container and a corresponding sensor assembly having a reader module in the housing case, as taught by Wegelin, in order to record and/or display information about the product, as well as to provide control over the containers that can be used in the device.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Celest in view of Muderlak (US 5,823,390).
Celest substantially discloses the claimed invention comprising:
a housing case (12 with 14) that defines a storage chamber (19);
a container (20) inserted into the storage chamber of the housing case (Col. 2, lines 65-66), the container having a base, and a sidewall (20 is a bottle; Col. 3, lines 17-18; see Figs. 3-4) that extends upwardly to a neck (21) that defines a top opening, which together form a liquid storage compartment for storing the liquid (Col. 2, lines 67-68);
a pump dispenser (22) mounted on the neck of the container (Col. 3, lines 3-4), covering the top opening (Fig. 4), for pumping the liquid out of the container, the pump dispenser having a tube (23) that extends downwardly into the liquid storage compartment of the container (Col. 3, lines 4-6), and a pump head (24) that moves between a raised position and a lowered position (Col. 3, lines 7-8, 15-17) for dispensing the liquid out an outlet tube (28) that extends laterally to an outlet port (28 bends to meet outlet of spout 25; Col. 3, lines 9-11; Fig. 4);
a receiver head (upper end of 28; see Figs. 3 and 5) having an opening adapted to receive the outlet tube of the pump dispenser (receiver head is integral with outlet tube 28), the receiver head being operably attached to the outlet tube, the outlet tube having a top end attached to the receiver head (receiver head is at upper end of 28), and a bottom end (discharge end 31; Fig. 3; erroneously referenced as 30 in Col. 3, lines 25-28);
a sensing means (16 with 18) for sensing motion beneath the housing case (Fig. 3; Col. 2, lines 58-64); and
a pumping means (32) for pushing the pump head of the container to the lowered position (Col. 3, lines 56-67), in response to the sensing means (Col. 3, line 67 - Col. 4, line 1).
Celest fails to disclose at least one spring positioned between the receiver head and a support platform of the housing case, for biasing the receiver head upwardly, thereby biasing the pump head toward the raised position. Instead, Celest discloses a pump with an internal biasing spring (Col. 3, lines 15-17). Muderlak teaches a similar dispenser (10, Figs. 1-3) having at least one spring (190) for biasing a receiver head (nozzle 22 with guides 30) upwardly (Col. 6, lines 36-39). Muderlak teaches this configuration as a means of facilitating removal and replacement of the container by allowing the receiver head to pivot while maintaining a leakproof connection with the outlet tube (Col. 4, line 63 - Col. 5, line 4).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to provide the dispenser of Celest with a receiver head biased upwardly by at least one spring, as taught by Muderlak, in order to facilitate leakproof removal and replacement of the container and pump dispenser. One having ordinary skill in the art would additionally be motivated to make such a modification in order to improve the recyclability of the replaceable container by having the spring (typically made of metal) incorporated into the device, while the container and any replaceable pump components within the container (typically made of plastic) could be recycled together.
Muderlak does not explicitly teach (and it is not clear from the Figures) that the at least one spring is supported by a support platform of the housing case, but one having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the at least one spring must be supported by a fixed structure in order to perform the function Muderlak describes. Further, the fixed support structure of the receiver head (guides 30) is taught to be supported by a connection to the housing case (via motor plate 31; Col. 5, lines 5-13). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to similarly provide a support platform from the housing case, since this would be one of a finite number of ways of providing a fixed structure to support the at least one spring, and one having ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success doing so.
Muderlak also does not explicitly teach that the biasing of the receiver head thereby biases a pump head toward a raised position, but notes that the receiver head is coupled to a hollow pump stem (Col. 3, line 61 - Col. 4, line 3). When applied to the device of Celest, as described above, the receiving head would be coupled to spout 25 of the pump head, and would thus bias the pump head toward a raised position via the at least one spring, arriving at the claimed invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 form. In particular, Hsu (US 8,342,369) and Ophardt et al. (US 10,849,468) disclose devices with features relevant to the independent claims of the instant application.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL C PATTERSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5558. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4:00 CST.
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, Paul Durand can be reached at 571-272-4459. 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.P./Examiner, Art Unit 3754
/PAUL R DURAND/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3754 September 11, 2025