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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on April 18, 2024 and August 22, 2025 were filed. The submissions are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group I: Claims 1-14 in the reply filed on October 23, 2025 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 15-18 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
An action on the merits of elected Claims 1-14 is provided below.
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 following should be shown in the drawings or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s):
at least one set of liquor mixing scales circumferentially disposed on an outer sidewall of the liquor bottle as recited in at least Claims 1 and 7.
a liquor mixing device as recited in at least Claim 9.
a tea bag containing liquor mixing balls or liquor mixing blocks as recited in at least Claim 10.
liquor mixing blocks or liquor mixing balls containing liquor mixing liquid as recited in at least Claim 11.
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 Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1-14 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “raw liquor liquid” in lines 6-7. It is unclear if this refers to “liquor mixing liquid” recited in Claim 1, line 4 or to an entirely different liquor liquid.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “at least one liquor mixing liquid bottle” in line 2. It is unclear if this refers to “a liquor bottle” recited in Claim 1, line 1 or to an entirely different liquid bottle.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “liquor mixing liquid” in line 4. It is unclear if this refers to “raw liquor liquid” recited in Claim 1, lines 6-7 or to an entirely different liquor liquid.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “auxiliary liquor liquid” in line 2. It is unclear what constitutes an “auxiliary” liquor liquid.
Claim 5 recites the limitation “wherein the auxiliary liquor liquid is mixed or blended liquor liquid that complies with national standards” in lines 1-2. It is unknown what “national standards” are being referred to. It is also unclear which nation(s) standards are being applied. For purposes of examination any raw liquor package assembly that is sold in any store reads on the claimed compliance with national standards since any consumable product that does not meet national standards cannot be legally sold in stores.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “a liquor bottle” in line 3. It is unclear if this refers to “a liquor bottle” recited in Claim 1, line 1 or to entirely different liquor bottles.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “a liquor bottle” in line 3. It is unclear if this refers to “a liquor bottle” recited in Claim 1, line 1 or to entirely different liquor bottles.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “the covering piece covers on the identification piece such that the identification piece is invisible and a blind box drinking style is formed” in lines 3-5. It is unclear what is meant by a “blind box drinking style.”
Clarification is required.
Claims 2, 6, 9-12, and 14 are rejected as being dependent on a rejected base claim.
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 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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duman US 2020/0039738 in view of Shimada US 2007/0138122, Evans et al. US 2021/0221553, Peirsman et al. US 2016/0251606, and Sorensen et al. US 2018/0237191.
Regarding Claim 1, Duman discloses a beverage package comprising a beverage container (cup 100). An upper portion of an inner cavity of the beverage container (cup 100) is a beverage mixing cavity (infusion chamber 2) and a lower portion of the inner cavity of the beverage container (cup 100) is a raw beverage cavity (exterior 5) (‘738, FIG. 4) (‘738, Paragraph [0018]).
PNG
media_image1.png
966
832
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Duman is silent regarding the beverage package being a raw liquor package, the beverage container being a liquor bottle, the beverage mixing cavity containing liquor to be a liquor mixing cavity, the lower portion of the inner cavity being a raw liquor cavity, an outer sidewall of the liquor bottle being circumferentially provided with at least one set of liquor mixing scales, and the raw liquor package further comprising raw liquor liquid packaged in the raw liquor cavity.
Shimada discloses a container having a cup shape, a bottle shape, or any other shape (‘122, Paragraph [0035]) wherein the container contains beverages and liquors (‘122, Paragraph [0002]).
Both Duman and Shimada are directed towards the same field of endeavor of containers storing beverages. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the beverage container of Duman and construct the cup shaped container of Duman to be in the shape of a liquor bottle as taught by Shimada since the configuration of the claimed beverage container is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence indicating such beverage container shape was significant in view of In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966) (MPEP § 2144.04.IV.B.). Shimada teaches that there was known utility in the beverage container art to construct a beverage container to have the shape of a liquor bottle. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the beverage container of Duman that stores any suitable mixture of liquids (‘738, Paragraph [0023]) and store liquor in the beverage container of Duman as taught by Shimada based upon the desired type of beverage to be made.
Further regarding Claim 1, Duman modified with Shimada discloses the liquor bottle containing liquor. However, Duman modified with Shimada is silent regarding the upper portion of the inner cavity being a liquor mixing cavity and the lower portion of the inner cavity being a raw liquor cavity. Duman modified with Shimada is also silent regarding the outer sidewall of the liquor bottle being circumferentially provided with at least one set of liquor mixing scales wherein the raw liquor package further comprises raw liquor liquid packaged in the raw liquor cavity.
Evans et al. discloses a liquor bottle comprising an inner cavity having a lower portion containing raw liquor (unaged distilled spirit such as moonshine) (‘553, Paragraph [0026]).
Both modified Duman and Evans et al. are directed towards the same field of endeavor of liquor bottles containing liquor. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the liquor bottle of modified Duman and store raw liquor liquid in the lower portion of the inner cavity of the liquor bottle in the form of unaged distilled spirits such as moonshine as taught by Evans et al. based upon the particular type of liquor desired to be stored within the liquor bottle.
Further regarding Claim 1, Duman discloses the upper portion of the inner cavity containing herbs, sliced citrus fruits, or otherwise and another flavoring substance or substances such as a liquid flavoring of liquid extract or concentrate (‘738, Paragraph [0099]). However, Duman modified with Shimada and Evans et al. is silent regarding the liquid flavoring combined with the herbs contained in the upper portion of the inner cavity to be a liquor mixing cavity. Duman modified with Shimada et al. and Evans et al. is also silent regarding the outer sidewall of the liquor bottle being circumferentially provided with at least one set of liquor mixing scales.
Peirsman et al. discloses a container comprising a chamber containing a concentrated beverage and other solid or liquid concentrated ingredients such as mixtures of alcohols and concentrated spices (‘606, Paragraph [0060]) wherein the container is a bottle (‘606, Paragraph [0051]).
Both modified Duman and Peirsman et al. are directed towards the same field of endeavor of liquor bottles containing liquor. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the upper portion of the inner cavity to also contain an alcohol that is mixed with the herbs as taught by Peirsman et al. based upon the desired alcoholic content of the beverages to be mixed.
Further regarding Claim 1, Duman modified with Shimada, Evans et al., and Peirsman et al. is silent regarding the outer sidewall of the liquor bottle being circumferentially provided with at least one set of liquor mixing scales.
Sorensen et al. discloses a beverage bottle (container 10) comprising an outer sidewall (body 26) circumferentially provided with at least one set of mixing scales (one or more markings or indicia 32 indicating the amount of liquid or fluid in the container) and a liquor mixing device comprising a mixing ball (agitator 34) (‘191, FIGS. 2 and 18) (‘191, Paragraphs [0050]-[0051]) wherein the beverage bottle allows its contents to be mixed and/or blended as desired (‘191, Paragraph [0011]).
PNG
media_image2.png
899
749
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Both modified Duman and Sorensen et al. are directed towards the same field of endeavor of beverage bottles containing beverage ingredients to be mixed together. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the outer sidewall of the beverage container to be circumferentially provided with at least one set of mixing scales as taught by Sorensen et al. in order to allow the user to fill the lower portion of the inner cavity of the beverage container to the desired level of the liquid to be mixed.
Further regarding Claim 1, the limitations “configured to provide an expansion space for self service liquor mixing for drinkers and accommodate liquor mixing liquid” are seen to be recitations regarding the intended use of the “raw liquor package.” In this regard, applicant’s attention is invited to MPEP § 2114.I. and MPEP § 2114.II. which states features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally in view of In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1478, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1432 (Fed. Cir. 1997). If an examiner concludes that a functional limitation is an inherent characteristic of the prior art, then to establish a prima facie case of anticipation or obviousness, the examiner should explain that the prior art structure inherently possess the functionally defined limitations of the claimed apparatus in view of In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1432. See also Bettcher Industries, Inc. v. Bunzl USA, Inc., 661 F.3d 629, 639-40,100 USPQ2d 1433, 1440 (Fed. Cir. 2011). The burden then shifts to applicant to establish that the prior art does not possess the characteristic relied on in view of In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1432; In re Swinehart, 439 F.2d 210, 213, 169 USPQ 226, 228 (CCPA 1971). Additionally, apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does in view of Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990). A claim containing a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claimed in view of Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). Furthermore, if the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Regarding Claim 2, the limitations “wherein the raw liquor liquid is made by fermenting and distilling brewing raw materials in a specific cellar without undergoing blending or mixing process, the specific cellar is one of multiple brewing fermentation cellars with different taste or flavor levels” are product by process limitations. Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product by process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process in view of In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (MPEP § 2113.I.).
Claims 3-5 and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duman US 2020/0039738 in view of Shimada US 2007/0138122, Evans et al. US 2021/0221553, Peirsman et al. US 2016/0251606, and Sorensen et al. US 2018/0237191 as applied to claim 1 above in further view of Tago US 6,598,419.
Regarding Claim 3, Duman modified with Shimada, Evans et al., Peirsman et al., and Sorensen et al. renders obvious the raw liquor package of Claim 1 and the liquor mixing liquid bottle containing liquor mixing liquid as enumerated in the obviousness rejection of Claim 1 provided above. However, modified Duman is silent regarding a packaging box provided with the raw liquor package.
Tago discloses a packaging box (cold preserving agents accommodation box 10) comprising a plurality of liquor bottles (‘419, Column 1, lines 42-50).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the liquor package of modified Duman and store the liquor package in a packaging box since Tago teaches that it was known and conventional in the food and beverage packaging art to package liquor bottles in a box.
Regarding Claim 4, Duman discloses the liquor mixing liquid comprising an auxiliary liquor liquid or edible spice liquid (liquid flavoring containing herbs) (‘738, Paragraph [0099]).
Regarding Claim 5, Peirsman et al. discloses the auxiliary liquor liquid being mixed liquor (spirits) (‘606, Paragraph [0049]).
Further regarding Claim 5, it is noted that the limitations “mixed or blended liquor that complies with national standards” are rejected as being indefinite under the indefiniteness rejections under 35 USC 112(b) enumerated above. It is unknown which nation(s) pertain to the claimed national standards. It is also unknown what national standards are being referred to.
Regarding Claims 7-8, the limitations “each of the raw liquor packages comprises a liquor bottle, an upper portion of an inner cavity of the liquor bottle is a liquor mixing cavity, the liquor mixing cavity is configured to provide an expansion space for self service liquor mixing for drinkers and accommodate liquor mixing liquid, a lower portion of the inner cavity of the liquor bottle is a raw liquor cavity, an outer sidewall of the liquor bottle is circumferentially provided with at least one set of liquor mixing scales, the raw liquor package further comprises raw liquor liquid packaged in the raw liquor cavity” recite the same limitations as an individual raw liquor package as recited in Claim 1. These limitations regarding a singular raw liquor package are rejected for the same reasons enumerated in the obviousness rejections of Claim 1. Furthermore, Tago discloses the packaging box being provided therein with multiple liquor packages (plurality of bottles) (‘419, Column 6, lines 32-38).
Further regarding Claim 7, Duman modified with Shimada, Evans et al., Peirsman et al., Sorensen et al., and Tago is silent regarding the raw liquor liquid in the multiple raw liquors being packaged from the same brewing fermentation cellar. However, the mere duplication of parts has not patentability significant unless a new and unexpected result is produced in view of In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) (MPEP § 2144.04.VI.B.). One of ordinary skill in the art would package multiple raw liquors from the same brewing fermentation cellar in order to provide in bulk a particular set of the same liquors as desired.
Further regarding Claim 8, Duman modified with Shimada, Evans et al., Peirsman et al., Sorensen et al., and Tago is silent regarding the raw liquor liquid in the multiple raw liquors being packaged from multiple brewing fermentation cellars with different flavors and tastes. However, one of ordinary skill in the art would package multiple raw liquors from brewing fermentation cellars with different flavors and tastes in order to sell a variety package of various different liquors to a consumer as desired.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duman US 2020/0039738 in view of Shimada US 2007/0138122, Evans et al. US 2021/0221553, Peirsman et al. US 2016/0251606, Sorensen et al. US 2018/0237191, and Tago US 6,598,419 as applied to claim 4 above in further view of Evans et al. US 2018/0119076 (herein referred to as “Evans et al. ‘076”).
Regarding Claim 6, Duman modified with Shimada, Evans et al., Peirsman et al., Sorensen et al., and Tago is silent regarding the liquor mixing liquid comprising distilled water.
Evans et al. ‘076 discloses a method of aging spirits such as moonshine comprising distilled water (‘076, Paragraph [0031]).
Both modified Duman and Evans et al. ‘076 are directed towards the same field of endeavor of liquors. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the package of modified Duman and incorporate distilled water into the liquid mixing liquid as taught by Evans et al. ‘076 since the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination in view of Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945) (MPEP § 2144.07). Evans et al. teaches that there was known utility in the beverage art to make liquors with distilled water.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duman US 2020/0039738 in view of Shimada US 2007/0138122, Evans et al. US 2021/0221553, Peirsman et al. US 2016/0251606, Sorensen et al. US 2018/0237191, and Tago US 6,598,419 as applied to claim 3 above in further view of Sorensen US 6,379,032 (herein referred to as “Sorensen ‘032’).
Regarding Claim 9, Sorensen et al. discloses a liquor mixing device (agitator 34) (‘191, FIG. 2) (‘191, Paragraph [0051]). However, Duman modified with Shimada, Evans et al., Peirsman et al., Sorensen et al., and Tago is silent regarding the liquor mixing device comprising multiple liquor mixing balls.
Sorensen ‘032 discloses a beverage bottle comprising a mixing device comprising multiple mixing balls (plurality of interior agitators 44 that are spherically shaped) (‘032, FIG. 5) (‘032, Column 5, lines 30-42).
PNG
media_image3.png
815
954
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Both modified Duman and Sorensen ‘032 are directed towards the same field of endeavor of beverage containers containing beverages that are to be mixed. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the package of modified Duman that uses only one mixing ball and incorporate multiple mixing balls as taught by Sorensen ‘032 since the mere duplication of parts has not patentability significant unless a new and unexpected result is produced in view of In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) (MPEP § 2144.04.VI.B.). One of ordinary skill in the art would package multiple mixing balls as taught by Sorensen ‘032 in order to more effectively mix the beverage contained therein.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duman US 2020/0039738 in view of Shimada US 2007/0138122, Evans et al. US 2021/0221553, Peirsman et al. US 2016/0251606, Sorensen et al. US 2018/0237191, Tago US 6,598,419, and Sorensen US 6,379,032 (herein referred to as “Sorensen ‘032’) as applied to claim 9 above in further view of Grossman US 2016/0200502.
Regarding Claim 10, Duman modified with Shimada, Evans et al., Perisman et al., Sorensen et al., Tago, and Sorensen ‘032 is silent regarding the liquor mixing device further comprising a tea bag with thread and the tea bag containing the liquor mixing balls.
Grossman discloses a tea bag (porous container 810) (‘502, Paragraph [0051]) containing a liquid mixing device comprising balls (balls comprising mixture with honey 820) (‘502, FIG. 8) (‘502, Paragraph [0033]) wherein the tea bag contains a thread (‘502, Paragraph [0055]) wherein the balls comprising honey encompasses a semi dry flavoring substance and/or a dry flavoring substance (‘502, Paragraph [0027]) which balls are applied in an interior of the tea bag (‘502, Paragraph [0039]) and contains herbs or spices (‘502, Paragraph [0055]) wherein the tea bag is used to mix ingredients together (‘502, Paragraphs [0028]-[0029] and [0047]). The tea bag contains a thread (string) (‘502, Paragraph [0055]).
PNG
media_image4.png
901
983
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Both modified Duman and Grossman are directed towards the same field of endeavor of infusion beverage packages comprising herbs. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the liquor mixing device of modified Duman and incorporate the liquor mixing balls into a tea bag since Grossman teaches that it was known in the beverage packaging art to incorporate an ingredient mixing ball inside of a tea bag for the purposes of mixing ingredients containing herbs together to make a beverage.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duman US 2020/0039738 in view of Shimada US 2007/0138122, Evans et al. US 2021/0221553, Peirsman et al. US 2016/0251606, Sorensen et al. US 2018/0237191, Tago US 6,598,419, and Sorensen US 6,379,032 (herein referred to as “Sorensen ‘032’) as applied to claim 9 above in further view of Masifilo US 2016/0309944.
Regarding Claim 11, Duman discloses ingredients containing solid particles which release flavor substances (‘738, Paragraph [0099]). However, Duman modified with Shimada, Evans et al., Perisman et al., Sorensen et al., Tago, and Sorensen ‘032 is silent regarding the liquor mixing device being made of food grade stainless steel and the liquor mixing balls containing liquor mixing liquid with a constant volume.
Masifilo discloses a beverage brewing method comprising the step of placing a quantity of kava root into a straining ball apparatus with a quantity of a beverage medium (‘424, Paragraph [0015]) wherein the straining ball apparatus is made of stainless steel (‘944, Paragraph [0027]).
PNG
media_image5.png
857
986
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Both modified Duman and Masifilo are directed towards the same field of endeavor of beverage containers for straining beverage ingredients. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the package of modified Duman and incorporate mixing balls containing beverage mixing liquid with a constant volume since Masifilo teaches that there was known utility in the beverage art to incorporate beverage mixing liquids within a mixing ball. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to construct the liquid mixing device of modified Duman out of food grade stainless steel as taught by Masifilo since the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination in view of Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945) (MPEP § 2144.07). Masifilo teaches that there was known utility in the beverage mixing art to construct liquid mixing balls out of food grade stainless steel.
Claims 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duman US 2020/0039738 in view of Shimada US 2007/0138122, Evans et al. US 2021/0221553, Peirsman et al. US 2016/0251606, Sorensen et al. US 2018/0237191, and Tago US 6,598,419 as applied to claim 3 above in further view of Landry et al. US 2018/0157946 and Burton et al. US 2021/0354975.
Regarding Claim 12, Duman modified with Shimada, Evans et al., Peirsman et al., Sorensen et al., and Tago is silent regarding the outer sidewall of the liquor bottle being provided with an identification piece wherein the identification piece has at least a cellar number identification, a cellar alcohol content identification, a flavor identification, and cellar grade information corresponding to the raw liquor liquid thereon.
Landry et al. discloses a wine and liquor bottle comprising a neck having a 2D barcode label bonded to said neck (‘946, FIG. 3) (‘946, Paragraph [0055]) wherein the use obtains information on the product and accesses promotional material issued by the manufacturer or seller of the product and to verify authenticity of the product (‘946, Paragraph [0056]).
PNG
media_image6.png
996
1020
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Burton et al. discloses a smart device housing comprising a screen for the display of information pertaining to a beverage vessel, its contents or its intended use in the supply chain wherein the display is used for showing a unique identifier, serial number, or QR code for the beverage vessel or smart device, indicating the beverage or batch information of the contents of the beverage vessel such as name, alcoholic content, production date, manufacturer, instructions for appropriate storage and transport of the beverage container, freshness indications of the contents of the beverage vessel including data that has been calculated locally or in the cloud based on time and storage temperature, advertising or promotional instructions (‘975, Paragraph [0164]).
Modified Duman, Landry et al., and Burton et al. are all directed towards the same field of endeavor of beverage containers containing alcoholic beverages. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the liquor package of modified Duman and provide the outer sidewall of the liquor bottle with an identification piece in the form of a bar code and/or QR code as taught by Landry et al. and Burton et al. in order to provide information on the product and access promotion material issued by the manufacturer or seller of the product and to verify authenticity of the product (‘946, Paragraph [0056]) as well as to notify the handler of the beverage container of an important pending messages (‘975, Paragraph [0156]) and to indicate the beverage or batch information of the contents of the beverage vessel such as name, alcoholic content, production date, manufacturer, instructions for appropriate storage and transport of the beverage container (‘975, Paragraph [0164]). Although Landry et al. and Burton et al. does not explicitly disclose the identification piece having a cellar number identification or a cellar alcohol content identification or the flavor identification or the cellar grade information specifically, Landry et al. discloses providing information on the product issued by the manufacturer or seller (‘946, Paragraph [0056]) and indicating the alcoholic content of the beverage and the batch information (‘975, Paragraph [0164]). One of ordinary skill in the art would incorporate any desired information pertaining to the contents of the beverage of modified Duman on an identification piece in the form of the bar code and/or QR code with any information pertaining to the contents of the beverage as taught by Landry et al. and Burton et al.
Regarding Claim 14, Landry et al. discloses the identification piece being provided with a digital identifier (barcode/QR code) capable of being scanned (‘946, Paragraphs [0001]-[0002]). Burton et al. also discloses the identification piece being provided with a digital identifier capable of being scanned (‘975, Paragraphs [0156] and [0164]) wherein the scanning is done through a mobile terminal (mobile phone) (‘975, Paragraph [0151]) capable of connecting to a cloud server based on sending prize information (promotional instructions) (‘975, Paragraph [0164]).
Further regarding Claim 14, the limitations “for scanning and identification by mobile terminals, the digital identifier is configured for a mobile terminal to scan and thereby connect to a cloud server of a distiller or supplier and upload cellar information corresponding to the raw liquor in the liquor bottle to the cloud server of the distillery or supplier such that the cloud server of the distillery or supplier sends electronic gifts, electronic currencies, or prize information corresponding to the cellar information to the mobile terminal” are product by process limitations and as such are rejected for the same reasons regarding product by process limitations enumerated in the rejections of Claim 2 above.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duman US 2020/0039738 in view of Shimada US 2007/0138122, Evans et al. US 2021/0221553, Peirsman et al. US 2016/0251606, Sorensen et al. US 2018/0237191, Tago US 6,598,419, Landry et al. US 2018/0157946, and Burton et al. US 2021/0354975 as applied to claim 14 above in further view of Vasquez Moreno US 2021/0012685.
Regarding Claim 13, Duman modified with Shimada, Evans et al., Peirsman et al., Sorensen et al., Tago, Landry et al., and Burton et al. is silent regarding the outer sidewall of the liquor bottle being further provided with a removable covering piece that is removable from the outer sidewall of the liquor bottle and the covering piece covering the identification piece such that the identification piece is invisible and a blind box drinking style is formed.
Vasquez Moreno discloses an identification piece (label containing code or pattern and numbers or letters) covered by a removable covering piece (adhesive upper layer) wherein the identification piece (label) is attached to a liquor product that needs to be certified or origin validated (‘685, Paragraph [0015]).
Both modified Duman and Vasquez Moreno are directed towards the same field of endeavor of liquor packages. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the liquor package of modified Duman and incorporate a removable covering piece that covers the identification piece such that the identification piece is invisible and a blind box drinking style is formed as taught by Vasquez Moreno in order to enable tracing of the product and determine if the product has been adulterated or counterfeited or if it legal and original and suitable for consumption (‘685, Paragraph [0001]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sellars US 5,950,819 discloses a beverage bottle (bottle 2) comprising an upper portion (second vessel 6) of an inner cavity of the beverage bottle (bottle 2) (‘819, Column 4, lines 19-30) and a lower portion of the inner cavity of the beverage bottle (bottle 2) containing a liquid beverage (‘819, FIG. 3) (‘819, Column 3, lines 31-45) wherein the contents of the beverage bottle are mixed together when desired (‘819, Column 1, lines 7-14) and the substances are consumed (‘819, Column 10, lines 57-67).
PNG
media_image7.png
851
752
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Clark US 2019/0053591 discloses a case to carry small bottles and a funnel.
Burlage et al. US 2011/0017787 discloses a method and device for carrying alcoholic miniature bottles.
Reyes US 8,002,129 discloses a liquor bottle device.
Carroll et al. US 5,986,219 discloses a method of inventorying liquor
Kjenner US 2018/0263424 discloses a shaker ball for incorporating air into foods wherein the shaker ball is made of food grade stainless steel (‘424, FIG. 2) (‘424, Paragraph [0044]).
Morgan US 9,759,595 discloses a pitcher and mixing ruler for preparing and dispensing beverages
Kalamaras US 9,706,880 discloses a beverage shaker bottle (assembled shaker 10) comprising a sidewall containing level scales (level markers for precise measurements) and a mixing device (agitator) (‘880, FIGS. 11-12) (‘880, Column 1, lines 33-52).
Grimm et al. US 2003/0034392 discloses a system for taking an inventory of liquor beverage products identified by code such as conventional barcodes (‘392, Paragraph [0002]) wherein the code sets forth information that identifies the product contained within the container wherein the code is an identification label displaying the product name (‘392, Paragraph [0027]).
Drori US 2018/0237732 discloses a wine barrel comprising a barcode used in a system that stores a record of the type of wine and/or other treatment parameters and/or history, e.g. time, turbidity target.
Vogt et al. US 2008/0201094 discloses a system for certifying provenance of an alcoholic beverage by tracking environmental conditions of a bottle containing the alcoholic beverage during its progress through a distribution channel (‘094, Paragraph [0045]) using a bar code label attached to the body or label of the bottle and a neck seal with coded covert ink around the base of each capsule (‘094, Paragraph [0046]) wherein the bar code allows a user to retrieve information associated with the bottle such as a description of provenance or the plurality of measurements by transmitting the barcode to a server (‘094, Paragraph [0069]) wherein the server displays the certification of provenance upon receiving form a user an identification number associated with a bottle and a request for a certification of provenance of an alcoholic beverage contained in the bottle (‘094, Paragraph [0080]) wherein an RFID tag measures a plurality of values of an environmental condition of a bottle (‘094, Paragraph [0082]) wherein the barcode is printed in invisible ink (‘094, Paragraph [0089]).
Wilkie et al. US 2020/0078433 discloses a beverage bottle comprising a printed label and barcode that includes a unit package production code, kind of product, beverage container type and size, ABV quantity and proof of spirits, alcoholic beverage health warning statement (‘433, Paragraph [0063]).
Vandekerckhove et al. US 2013/0221029 discloses a container closure comprising a barcode or any other identification system to identify the mark of a beer, nutritional information such as the alcohol content, sugar content, the year of fabrication, the date of consumption, and the like (‘029, Paragraph [0053]).
Hyde et al. US 2011/0029255 discloses an alcohol container including a barcode label having alcohol content information on the alcohol containing liquid wherein an optical reader optically scans the alcohol content information from the barcode label (‘255, Paragraph [0034]).
Chait US 2004/0176666 discloses a food product comprising a barcode having input data relating to the food product such as calorie content, fat content, fiber content, alcohol content, etc. (‘666, Paragraph [0040]) wherein separate barcodes could be employed (‘666, Paragraph [0077]).
Braus et al. US 2,859,117 discloses a method of processing distilled alcoholic liquid comprising intimately contacting distilled alcoholic liquid treatment with aged raw liquor with carbon, recovering a carbon filter cake containing adsorbed congeneric and flavor producing precursor constituents, extracting the adsorbed materials from the carbon, distilling the extract to remove the extractant and recovering as the crude residue the flavored materials and flavor producing precursors wherein excess alcohol is subsequently removed by distillation wherein concentrated liquor or whiskey flavorants are then recovered (‘117, Column 2, lines 3-22).
Herrick US 2,086,080 discloses a method of treating distilled liquor beverages (‘080, Left Column of Page 1, lines 1-2) comprising the step of blending raw liquor beverage with other liquors or a proper amount of distilled water to reduce it to the alcoholic content desired for commercial purposes and marked (‘080, Left Column of Page 5, lines 52-70) wherein unaged distilled liquor beverages are raw liquors (‘080, Left Column of Page 1, lines 9-11).
Levitt US 2006/0051491 discloses a beverage mixing container wherein liquid is added to the container (‘491, Paragraph [0001]) comprising a spherical mixing device placed in the mixing container to help strain and break up clumps of dry protein powder and made of any suitable flexible material (‘491, FIG. 7) (‘491, Paragraph [0047]).
Frizell US 2020/0299035 discloses a food and beverage container comprising a sidewall having a scale disposed on an inner surface of said sidewall (‘035, FIG. 3).
Smith et al. US 2016/0159564 discloses a beverage container comprising a sidewall having a scale disposed on an outer surface of said sidewall (‘564, FIG. 3).
Pivirotto et al. US 2019/0038054 discloses a beverage container (container 100) comprising a sidewall having a scale (ounce markers 605) wherein the beverage container contains liquor, wine, and beer liquid (‘054, FIG. 6C) (‘054, Paragraph [0040]).
Smith et al. US 2014/0138274 discloses a beverage container (container 12) comprising a sidewall having a scale wherein the beverage container contains beer, wine, liquor, or any other suitable beverage or liquid (‘274, Paragraph [0066]).
Siri US 2006/0169792 discloses a beverage container containing beer, wine, and the like (‘792, Paragraph [0014]).
Currington US 2017/0355508 discloses a method of mixing a liquid with a liquid (‘508, Paragraph [0016]) comprising providing a container
Orth US 3,870,147 discloses a bottle (container 1) comprising an upper portion (bottle neck 7) of an inner cavity of the bottle (container 1) that is a mixing cavity (chambers 3, 4 mixes together) and a lower portion of the inner cavity of the bottle (container 1) is a liquid cavity (‘147, FIG. 1) (‘147, Column 2, lines 53-66).
PNG
media_image8.png
937
995
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Seagram US 2015/0368034 discloses a beverage bottle comprising an inner cavity having an upper portion (infusion package 10) that is a mixing cavity (‘034, Paragraphs [0042]-[0043] and [0069]) and a lower portion (cup 114) containing a beverage liquid (liquid 116) (‘034, FIGS. 10-13) (‘034, Paragraph [0104]) wherein the upper portion (infusion package 10) contains any plant based infusible material or any infusible material including spices, flavors, colors, or any suitable material capable of infusion (‘034, Paragraph [0060]) and a rigid member (rigid member 16) of the upper portion (infusion package 10) is impregnated with at least one additive such that the infusible material and the at least one additive are separated until at least a portion of the infusion package is submerged in the liquid wherein the additive is in any suitable form for infusing and comprises any suitable additive such as flavors, colors, spices, or the like (‘034, Paragraph [0070]).
PNG
media_image9.png
1278
793
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Lemonier US 4,792,454 discloses a liquor container (‘454, Column 1, lines 48-58) for fermentation.
Boggs et al. US 2019/0315532 discloses it is common in the distilled spirits industry to sell Moonshine in mason jars (‘532, Paragraph [0037]).
Brown III US 2014/0072669 discloses a container (mason jar 110) containing a distilled spirit of moonshine or white lightning that includes a fruit, a spice, a nut, a grain, a charcoal, a rum, or other flavoring (‘669, Paragraph [0041]).
Lindenmayer US 2010/0176188 discloses a bottle box for transporting, storing, and displaying beverages (‘188, Paragraph [0001]) comprising two bottles (dual bottle box 100) (‘188, FIG. 10) (‘188, Paragraph [0030]) for storing liquor (‘188, Paragraph [0002]).
PNG
media_image10.png
911
1042
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Denig “What Is Alcoholic Fermentation?” <https://www.liquor.com/alcoholic-fermentation-5086917> (published November 10, 2020) discloses spirits are beverages containing alcohol which means that they have undergone the process of fermentation (Denig et al., Page 1).
Stryker et al. “Alcoholic Boba Is a Real Thing and You Need It In Your Life” <https://www.buzzfeed.com/samstryker/we-tried-spiked-boba-and-it-was-amazing> (published November 16, 2016) discloses alcoholic boba (Stryker et al., Page 1).
Bubble Tea Supply “How to Make Vodka Infused Boba Tapioca Pearls” <https://blog.bubbleteasupply.biz/make-vodka-infused-boba-tapioca-pearls/> (published September 19, 2016) discloses a method of making vodka infused boba (Bubble Tea Supply, Page 3).
Mullenberg “Homemade Herbal Liqueur” <https://imbibemagazine.com/recipe/diy-herbal-liqueur/> (published August 10, 2015) discloses a bottled herbal liqueur comprising vodka infused with herbs (Mullenberg, Pages 1-2).
Compton “Thailand’s Dirt Cheap Moonshine Is Going Upscale in Bangkok” <https://www.vice.com/en/article/thailands-dirt-cheap-moonshine-is-going-upscale-in-bangkok/> (published April 9, 2016) discloses an herbal Thai moonshine made by fermenting white liquor with herbs and roots that is believed to be medicinal.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERICSON M LACHICA whose telephone number is (571)270-0278. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8:30am-5pm, EST.
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, Erik Kashnikow can be reached at 571-270-3475. 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.
/ERICSON M LACHICA/Examiner, Art Unit 1792