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 .
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.
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 20-34 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 20 requires “wherein a movement of the fluid does not move the selectably movable rigid surface”. This is not disclosed in the specification.
Claim 25 requires the displacer to have a “rigid” movable surface (see the specification that discloses the vessel is rigid and it makes no mention of the displacer being rigid, paragraph 0011). A similar rejection applies to claims 20 and 29.
Claims 20-34 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.
The term “rigid” in claim 20 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “ rigid” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is not clear how much rigidity the displacer needs to have in order to be both movable and rigid at the same time. Rigid in displacers is not an art specific term. A similar rejection applies for claims 25 and 29.
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.
Claim(s) 20, 21, 25, 26, 27, 28 29, 30, 31, 33 and 34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Eric Corti (youtube, April 1st 2012)
Regarding claim 20, Corti teaches an apparatus for preserving a liquid (Corti teaches that the apparatus is for such), comprising: a vessel (Corti teaches that the “Air Cork” is usable with a vessel) comprising a vessel interior surface (Corti teaches that the “Air Cork” is usable with a vessel) defining an interior space to contain the liquid (Corti teaches that the “Air Cork” is usable with a vessel, such as a wine container), wherein the vessel includes a top portion (wine containers have a top) having an aperture (opening in the wine container, at the top) defined therethrough; a rigid interior surface of the top portion, wherein the top portion interior surface slopes (see time 0:59 in the youtube video that shows the sloped top surface) significantly downward from the aperture to a side of the vessel; and a displacer (inflatable blader) disposed within the vessel, wherein the displacer includes a selectably movable rigid surface (where the displacer is a solid object having some rigidity) within the interior volume, wherein movement of the selectably movable rigid surface changes a volume of the interior volume and wherein movement of the fluid does not move the selectably movable rigid surface (where a user has to pump air in the ballon to get it to move).
Regarding claim 21, wherein the selectably movable surface of the displacer contacts the liquid and drives air above the liquid out of the interior through the aperture (see youtube video).
Regarding claim 25, see the rejection above and Fig. 1 that teaches the following: An apparatus for preserving a liquid, comprising: a vessel comprising an interior surface defining an interior containing the liquid; a displacer (ballon) disposed within the vessel, wherein the displacer includes a movable element (ballon) within the interior defining a rigid movable surface (ballon) subjecting the liquid to compression within the interior, driving air out of the vessel interior, and changing a level of the liquid (see youtube video).
Regarding claim 26, a displacement indicator (air displaced within the wine bottle) in fluid communication within the vessel interior and including apportion displaying the level of the liquid (a portion of the air meeting the liquid will be the displacement indicator).
Regarding claim 27, a stopper fitted over the top of the displacement indicator (the vessel is a wine bottle having a stopper placed over the top opening).
Regarding claim 29, see the rejection of claim 1 that teaches the following a apparatus (air cork, see youtube video) for preserving a liquid, comprising: a vessel (see time 0:59 in that video, that shows the device is usable with a wine bottle) comprising: an interior surface defining an interior space to contain the liquid; and an aperture (opening in wine bottle) formed in the top of the vessel, wherein the aperture is positioned in an upper portion of the interior space; a rigid displacer (ballon, where the displacer is a solid object that has some rigidity) disposed within the vessel, comprising: an outer rim sealingly engaging the interior surface of the vessel, and wherein: the rigid displacer is selectably movable vertically within the interior space parallel to the interior surface and below the open top; and a movement of the rigid displacer changes the volume of the interior space and a level of the liquid (the displacer moves in all directions including vertically).
Regarding claim 30, the displacer contacts the liquid and drives air above the liquid out of the interior through the aperture as the displacer changes the volume of the interior space (see youtube video).
Regarding claim 31, further comprising a cover (see youtube video that shows a wine bottle, where the wine vessel has a cork) fitted over a top of the vessel.
Regarding claim 33, the movable element comprises a rigid top portion within the interior; the rigid movable surface comprises a selectably movable rigid bottom surface of the top portion; movement of the selectably movable rigid bottom surface changes a volume of the interior; and the selectably movable rigid bottom surface slopes significantly downward from a center of the displacer to an outer edge of the displacer (see youtube video).
Regarding claim 34, the rigid displacer comprises a top portion within the interior; a selectably movable rigid bottom surface of the rigid top portion, wherein the selectably movable rigid bottom surface slopes significantly downward from a center of the top portion to an outer edge of the top portion (see youtube video).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 22-24, 28 and 32 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/18/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues the 112 rejection should be moot because one of ordinary skill should understand “rigid”. Examiner disagrees. Please see the updated rejection above.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 20-34 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAREEN KAY THOMAS whose telephone number is (571)270-5611. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am-5:00pm.
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, Orlando E. Aviles can be reached at 571-270-5531. 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.
/KAREEN K THOMAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3736