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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species B, Figure 2 in the reply filed on 08/05/26 is acknowledged.
As the Applicant elected Species B, the Applicant indicated that claims 1-6, 8, and 9 read upon the elected species (accordingly claims 7 and 10 are non-elected).
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 3, 4, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 3 recites “parts of the freshly brewed coffee beverage are drained away….”, it is unclear
which “parts” are being referenced. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 3 recites “parts of the freshly brewed coffee beverage are drained away…in a targeted
manner.”, it is unclear what is meant and/or what structure is being referneced by the term “targeted manner” as recited in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4 recites “the device as claimed in claim 4”, the claim depending upon itself is improper.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 recites “activate briefly a hot water flow”; however, the term “briefly” is unclear as no frame of reference regarding what constitutes a brief time is provided by the claim and/or the written description. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 recites “the device as claimed in claim 1, wherein for carrying out the pre-heating operation….”, it is submitted that claim the claim is directed toward an apparatus, however the aforementioned limitation renders the claim indefinite as the claim recites both a product and process in the same claim (see MPEP 2173.05(p)(II): II. PRODUCT AND PROCESS IN THE SAME CLAIM
A single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. See In re Katz Interactive Call Processing Patent Litigation, 639 F.3d 1303, 1318, 97 USPQ2d 1737, 1748-49 (Fed. Cir. 2011). Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huber et al. (EP 3195768).
With regard to claim 1, Huber teaches a device for preparing a coffee beverage (“FIG. 1 schematically shows a section of a hot beverage preparation device 10, for example, a coffee machine”), the device comprising: a brewing unit (1), to which hot water from a hot water heater is suppliable under pressure (“A hot beverage preparation device usually comprises a fluid transport system in which a fluid, usually water, is pumped through a heating system and heated.”; “the fluid transport system has a pressure piston system with a pressure piston, which is set up to use a pressure present in the fluid transport system as a drive pressure for moving the pressure piston and to control the suction unit (3) with the aid of the movement of the pressure piston.”); a beverage outlet (2a/2b) connected to the brewing unit via an outlet line (4) and via which a freshly brewed coffee beverage (via brewing unit 1) is dispensable into a drinking vessel (inherent that drinking vessel be placed under beverage dispensing unit 2 via an outlet 2a/2b) to be placed thereunder; a return pump (3) connected on an intake side in a fluid-conducting manner to the outlet line (4) and which opens on a delivery side into a drain (8) or a collecting container in order to suction coffee beverage out of the outlet line (4) before, during or after a brewing operation and to conduct the coffee beverage into the drain (8) or collecting container (“The hot beverage preparation device 10 further comprises a suction unit 3, which is connected via a branch line 5 to the beverage discharge line 4 and serves to suck after operation of the hot beverage preparation device 10 possibly remaining in the beverage discharge line 4 remaining residual fluid, such as a residue of the hot drink or steam , In this way, when the hot beverage preparation device 10 is operated again, no residual fluid is unintentionally dispensed via the beverage dispensing unit 2 or mixed with the hot beverage within the beverage dispensing line 4.”, “a residual fluid outlet 8 is arranged on the side wall of the cylinder 7 through which sucked into the cylinder chamber of the cylinder 7 residual fluid can flow.”; the claimed “controller” is inherently present within the cited prior art citation: “In addition, an actuation or control of the suction piston, for example by means of an actuator unit, is very easy to implement.”).
With regard to the limitation of a controller for activating the return pump, the controller is configured to allow hot water to be introduced into the outlet line or into the brewing unit and outlet line during a pre-heating operation and to activate the return pump during the pre-heating operation, it is submitted that the citation teaches the structural limitations as claimed as detailed above; however, the citation does not specifically teach “a pre-heating operation”. However, as the claim is directed toward an apparatus, it is submitted that a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. As that a device according to the teachings of the cited prior art would be capable of performing the required intended use and no structural differentiation has been identified, it is the examiner’s determination that this feature does not define the present invention over the cited prior art. See MPEP § 2114.
With regard to claim 2, Huber teaches the controller is further configured to activate the return pump (3) such that residues of the coffee beverage remaining in the outlet line (4) are suctioned away following a brewing operation (“The hot beverage preparation device 10 further comprises a suction unit 3, which is connected via a branch line 5 to the beverage discharge line 4 and serves to suck after operation of the hot beverage preparation device 10 possibly remaining in the beverage discharge line 4 remaining residual fluid, such as a residue of the hot drink or steam , In this way, when the hot beverage preparation device 10 is operated again, no residual fluid is unintentionally dispensed via the beverage dispensing unit 2 or mixed with the hot beverage within the beverage dispensing line 4.”, “a residual fluid outlet 8 is arranged on the side wall of the cylinder 7 through which sucked into the cylinder chamber of the cylinder 7 residual fluid can flow.”; the claimed “controller” is inherently present within the cited prior art citation: “In addition, an actuation or control of the suction piston, for example by means of an actuator unit, is very easy to implement.”).
With regard to claim 3, Huber teaches the controller is further configured to activate the return pump (3) such that, during the brewing operation of a coffee beverage, parts of the freshly brewed coffee beverage are drained away in a time-controlled and targeted manner (“The hot beverage preparation device 10 further comprises a suction unit 3, which is connected via a branch line 5 to the beverage discharge line 4 and serves to suck after operation of the hot beverage preparation device 10 possibly remaining in the beverage discharge line 4 remaining residual fluid, such as a residue of the hot drink or steam , In this way, when the hot beverage preparation device 10 is operated again, no residual fluid is unintentionally dispensed via the beverage dispensing unit 2 or mixed with the hot beverage within the beverage dispensing line 4.”, “a residual fluid outlet 8 is arranged on the side wall of the cylinder 7 through which sucked into the cylinder chamber of the cylinder 7 residual fluid can flow.”; the claimed “controller” providing a time-controlled and targeted manner is inherently present within the cited prior art citation as the operation is taught by the prior art as occurring after the time of a brewing operation: “In addition, an actuation or control of the suction piston, for example by means of an actuator unit, is very easy to implement.”). Notwithstanding the foregoing, it is submitted that the limitation of “a time-controlled and targeted manner” refers to functional limitations, and as such, It is noted that a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. As that a device according to the combined teachings of the cited prior art would be capable of performing the required intended use and no structural differentiation has been identified, it is the examiner’s determination that this feature does not define the present invention over the cited prior art. See MPEP § 2114.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huber et al. (EP 3195768) in view of Coway (WO 2015084005).
With regard to claim 5, Huber teaches a device for preparing a coffee beverage (“FIG. 1 schematically shows a section of a hot beverage preparation device 10, for example, a coffee machine”), the device comprising: a brewing unit (1), to which hot water from a hot water heater is suppliable under pressure (“A hot beverage preparation device usually comprises a fluid transport system in which a fluid, usually water, is pumped through a heating system and heated.”; “the fluid transport system has a pressure piston system with a pressure piston, which is set up to use a pressure present in the fluid transport system as a drive pressure for moving the pressure piston and to control the suction unit (3) with the aid of the movement of the pressure piston.”); a beverage outlet (2a/2b) connected to the brewing unit via an outlet line (4) and via which a freshly brewed coffee beverage (via brewing unit 1) is dispensable into a drinking vessel (inherent that drinking vessel be placed under beverage dispensing unit 2 via an outlet 2a/2b) to be placed thereunder; a return pump (3) connected on an intake side in a fluid-conducting manner to the outlet line (4) and which opens on a delivery side into a drain (8) or a collecting container in order to suction coffee beverage out of the outlet line (4) before, during or after a brewing operation and to conduct the coffee beverage into the drain (8) or collecting container (“The hot beverage preparation device 10 further comprises a suction unit 3, which is connected via a branch line 5 to the beverage discharge line 4 and serves to suck after operation of the hot beverage preparation device 10 possibly remaining in the beverage discharge line 4 remaining residual fluid, such as a residue of the hot drink or steam , In this way, when the hot beverage preparation device 10 is operated again, no residual fluid is unintentionally dispensed via the beverage dispensing unit 2 or mixed with the hot beverage within the beverage dispensing line 4.”, “a residual fluid outlet 8 is arranged on the side wall of the cylinder 7 through which sucked into the cylinder chamber of the cylinder 7 residual fluid can flow.”; the claimed “controller” is inherently present within the cited prior art citation: “In addition, an actuation or control of the suction piston, for example by means of an actuator unit, is very easy to implement.”).
With regard to the limitation of a controller for activating the return pump, the controller is configured to allow hot water to be introduced into the outlet line or into the brewing unit and outlet line during a pre-heating operation and to activate the return pump during the pre-heating operation, it is submitted that the citation teaches the structural limitations as claimed as detailed above; however, the citation does not specifically teach “a pre-heating operation”. However, as the claim is directed toward an apparatus, it is submitted that a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. As that a device according to the teachings of the cited prior art would be capable of performing the required intended use and no structural differentiation has been identified, it is the examiner’s determination that this feature does not define the present invention over the cited prior art. See MPEP § 2114.
Huber does not teach further comprising a brewing valve which is arranged upstream of the brewing unit in a hot water supply line and which is opened for starting the brewing operation and which is closed after the brewing operation has been terminated, and the controller is further configured to activate the return pump before, together with or after the closure of the brewing valve. However, Coway from the same field of endeavor directed toward a coffee extraction device teaches the aforementioned limitation: brewing valve – “first vent valve”: “A first vent valve is provided between the heater and the coffee extraction unit, which is closed at the time of coffee extraction and is opened after coffee extraction, and is closed between the heater and the discharge member at the time of coffee extraction and opened after coffee extraction. 2 vent valve may be provided.”; return pump – “pressure pump 700”: “in order to discharge the remaining coffee more effectively, the pressure pump 700 or The suction pump 700 ′ may be connected to the discharge line LE. The coffee remaining by the operation of the pressure pump 700 may be discharged to the outside through the discharge member 500 via the discharge line (LE). In addition, the coffee remaining by the operation of the suction pump 700 'may be discharged to the outside through a separate discharge means (not shown) via the discharge line (LE).”, FIG. 9)
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device in the Huber reference, to include a brewing valve which is arranged upstream of the brewing unit in a hot water supply line and which is opened for starting the brewing operation and which is closed after the brewing operation has been terminated, and the controller is further configured to activate the return pump before, together with or after the closure of the brewing valve, as suggested and taught by Coway, for the purpose of providing a predetermined amount of water to achieve a desired brewed volume of a hot beverage via a brewing operation.
Claims 6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huber et al. (EP 3195768) in view of Lussi (US 2007/0031558)
With regard to claim 6, Huber teaches a device for preparing a coffee beverage (“FIG. 1 schematically shows a section of a hot beverage preparation device 10, for example, a coffee machine”), the device comprising: a brewing unit (1), to which hot water from a hot water heater is suppliable under pressure (“A hot beverage preparation device usually comprises a fluid transport system in which a fluid, usually water, is pumped through a heating system and heated.”; “the fluid transport system has a pressure piston system with a pressure piston, which is set up to use a pressure present in the fluid transport system as a drive pressure for moving the pressure piston and to control the suction unit (3) with the aid of the movement of the pressure piston.”); a beverage outlet (2a/2b) connected to the brewing unit via an outlet line (4) and via which a freshly brewed coffee beverage (via brewing unit 1) is dispensable into a drinking vessel (inherent that drinking vessel be placed under beverage dispensing unit 2 via an outlet 2a/2b) to be placed thereunder; a return pump (3) connected on an intake side in a fluid-conducting manner to the outlet line (4) and which opens on a delivery side into a drain (8) or a collecting container in order to suction coffee beverage out of the outlet line (4) before, during or after a brewing operation and to conduct the coffee beverage into the drain (8) or collecting container (“The hot beverage preparation device 10 further comprises a suction unit 3, which is connected via a branch line 5 to the beverage discharge line 4 and serves to suck after operation of the hot beverage preparation device 10 possibly remaining in the beverage discharge line 4 remaining residual fluid, such as a residue of the hot drink or steam , In this way, when the hot beverage preparation device 10 is operated again, no residual fluid is unintentionally dispensed via the beverage dispensing unit 2 or mixed with the hot beverage within the beverage dispensing line 4.”, “a residual fluid outlet 8 is arranged on the side wall of the cylinder 7 through which sucked into the cylinder chamber of the cylinder 7 residual fluid can flow.”; the claimed “controller” is inherently present within the cited prior art citation: “In addition, an actuation or control of the suction piston, for example by means of an actuator unit, is very easy to implement.”).
With regard to the limitation of a controller for activating the return pump, the controller is configured to allow hot water to be introduced into the outlet line or into the brewing unit and outlet line during a pre-heating operation and to activate the return pump during the pre-heating operation, it is submitted that the citation teaches the structural limitations as claimed as detailed above; however, the citation does not specifically teach “a pre-heating operation”. However, as the claim is directed toward an apparatus, it is submitted that a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. As that a device according to the teachings of the cited prior art would be capable of performing the required intended use and no structural differentiation has been identified, it is the examiner’s determination that this feature does not define the present invention over the cited prior art. See MPEP § 2114.
Huber does not teach a back-pressure valve arranged between the brewing unit and the beverage outlet in the outlet line, and the suction line of the return pump branches off from the outlet line downstream of the back-pressure valve. However, Lussi from the same field of endeavor directed toward a device for dispensing milk and/or milk froth teaches the aforementioned limitation: “Used for actuation of the piston cylinder unit 11 is water under pressure by means of which the piston is able to be impinged, this being controllable via a valve 13, while the return water is collected in a reservoir 14.”, para. [0030].
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device in the Huber reference, to include a back-pressure valve, as suggested and taught by Lussi, for the purpose of providing a predetermined amount of fluid having a specific pressurization value.
With regard to claim 8, although Huber teaches the return pump as claimed, the ciation does not teach that the return pump comprises a peristaltic pump. However, Lussi teaches a peristaltic pump: “Afterwards the container can be filled with rinse water, which can likewise be conveyed by the peristaltic pump through the system of lines of the device. This cleaning procedure is efficient and easy to carry out.”, para. [0014].
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device in the Huber reference, such that the return pump is a peristaltic pump, as suggested and taught by Lussi, for the purpose of providing an efficient cleaning operation.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH W ISKRA whose telephone number is (313) 446-4866. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 09:00-17:00 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, IBRAHIME ABRAHAM can be reached on 571-270-5569. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JOSEPH W ISKRA/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/IBRAHIME A ABRAHAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights