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 .
Priority
The claim to priority as a 371 filing of PCT/GB2022/051371, filed on May 27, 2022, which claims benefit to GB 2107705.2, filed on May 28, 2021 is acknowledged in the instant application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement filed on October 30, 2023 has been considered by the Examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show “tank 102” as described in the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). 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
Claim 12 is 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 12 recites the limitation "the alcoholic beverage" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-15 and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fearnside et al. (US Pub. 2020/0255777).
Regarding claims 1 and 15, Fearnside et al. discloses a customizable accelerated aging for distilled spirit having a method of flavoring a beverage processing apparatus, the apparatus comprising: an input (Fig. 3, bottom of the reaction chamber 311); an output (Fig. 3, top of the reaction chamber 311); a sonication chamber (reaction chamber 311, Fig. 3) defined in a flow path between the input and the output; a pump (305, Fig. 3) configured to move matter through the sonication chamber (311) towards the output; a sonotrode (ultrasonic transducers 315, Fig. 3) configured to sonicate matter as it passes through the sonication chamber (313), the method comprising: providing a suspension of a plurality of solid biological particles (wood chips; Abstract; Par. 46 and 50-51) suspended in a beverage; pumping, using the pump (305, Fig. 3), the suspension through the sonication chamber (311); sonicating, using the sonotrode (315), the suspension as it passes through the sonication chamber (311) whereby to release one or more organoleptic components ( e.g. esters) from the biological particles to alter a flavour of the beverage; after the suspension has been pumped through the sonication chamber (311), filtering the suspension (Par. 98, “a barrier or a filter is integrated within the reaction chamber 311”) outputting, at the output, filtering the suspension, flavor beverage, wherein at any position in the sonication chamber, a wall of the sonication chamber is provided within less than 3 centimeters of the position (Par. 132; Fig. 4 and 6). Fearnside et al. does not disclose pumping the suspension in the sonication chamber a plurality of times. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize in Fearnside et al., pumping the suspension in the sonication chamber a plurality of times, for the purpose improving the release of flavor in the beverage (due to the suspension passing several times through the reaction/sonication chamber.
Regarding claim 2, Fearnside et al. discloses substantially all features of the claimed invention as set forth above including the solid biological particles (wood chips; Abstract; Par. 46 and 50-51) in the suspension except the solid biological particles are between 1 and 20 percent by weight of the suspension. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize in Fearnside et al., the solid biological particles are between 1 and 20 percent by weight of the suspension, for the purpose of suitable to the user application to select the amount of the solid biological particles for enhancing of the flavor of the beverage.
Regarding claim 3, Fearnside et al. discloses substantially all features of the claimed invention as set forth above including wherein sonicating the suspension comprises providing a total sonicating energy input to the suspension of at least 15 watts per liter (.15J/gr) (Par. 66) of suspension (Par. 66) except of at least 20 joules per gram. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize in Fearnside et al., wherein sonicating the suspension comprises providing a total sonicating energy input to the suspension of at least 20 joules per gram, for the purpose of maintained throughout this process to ensure an even distribution of the cavitation and maturation and/or to maintain an evenly mixed reaction volume.
Regarding claim 5, Fearnside et al. discloses wherein sonicating the suspension uses sound having a frequency of at least 20 kHz (Par. 59).
Regarding claim 6, Fearnside et al. discloses substantially all features of the claimed invention as set forth above including the solid biological particles (wood chips 313, Fig. 3) in the sonication chamber (311, Fig. 3) in the beverage to sonicating the suspension except soaking the solid biological particles in the beverage for at least thirty minutes prior to sonicating the suspension. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize in Fearnside et al., soaking the solid biological particles in the beverage for at least thirty minutes prior to sonicating the suspension, for the purpose of promoting interaction of the spirit with the wood.
Regarding claims 7-8, Fearnside et al. discloses the solid biological particles comprises plant matter; and wherein the plant matter comprises at least one of wood, nuts and spices (Par. 58).
Regarding claim 9, Fearnside et al. discloses each of the solid biological particles (Par. 58) have a volume less than 3 cm3 (Par. 132, the reaction/sonication chamber having a rectangular pipe 401 has a side length of 3.81 cm, so particles are always less than 3 cm for preventing clogging, Fig. 4 and 6).
Regarding claim 10, Fearnside et al. discloses the step of controlling a temperature of the suspension to be less than a maximum temperature, the maximum temperature being less than 35° C (Par. 59).
Regarding claim 11, Fearnside et al. discloses substantially all features of the claimed invention as set forth above including the step of controlling a pressure of the suspension in the apparatus (Par. 69) except controlling the pressure to be less than a maximum pressure, the maximum pressure being less than 1.5 bar. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize in Fearnside et al., controlling the pressure to be less than a maximum pressure, the maximum pressure being less than 1.5 bar, for the purpose of controlling the pressure to provide a consistent product across a variety of climates and locations with varying humidities, atmospheric pressures, and temperatures.
Regarding claim 12, Fearnside et al. discloses the step of providing the beverage and, separately, the solid biological particles (Par. 58), and mixing an alcoholic beverage (Par. 49-50,) with the solid biological particles to provide the suspension.
Regarding claim 13, Fearnside et al. discloses the plurality of solid biological particles are formed by shredding one or more solid biological object (wood chips; Par. 58).
Regarding claim 14, Fearnside et al. discloses the plurality of solid biological particles (Par. 58) are heat-treated (Abstract).
Regarding claim 17, Fearnside et al. discloses the pump (305, Fig. 3) is a positive displacement pump (Par. 64).
Regarding claim 18, Fearnside et al. discloses the apparatus further comprises a controller configured to control at least one of the pump and sonotrode (315) in dependence on a desired flavor profile of the beverage (Par. 63, 66-67, 101; Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 19, Fearnside et al. discloses a capacity of the apparatus is at least 500 liters of beverage (Par. 107).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fearnside et al. (US Pub. 2020/0255777) in view of Iniesta Ortiz et al. (US Pub. 2017/0065960).
Regarding claim 4, Fearnside et al. discloses substantially all features of the claimed invention as set forth above except wherein sonicating the suspension uses sound having an amplitude of between 20 µm and 40 µm. Iniesta Ortiz et al. discloses wherein sonicating the suspension uses sound having an amplitude of between 20 µm and 40 µm (Par. 33). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize in Fearnside et al., wherein sonicating the suspension uses sound having an amplitude of between 20 µm and 40 µm, as taught by Iniesta Ortiz et al., for the purpose of extracting the compound from the particle more efficient.
Claim(s) 20-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fearnside et al. (US Pub. 2020/0255777) in view of Iniesta Stenerhag et al. (WO 2021/105199).
Regarding claims 20-21, Fearnside et al. discloses substantially all features of the claimed invention as set forth above including the apparatus of claim 15 except an intermodal shipping container. Stenerhag et al. discloses an intermodal shipping container (3) for the modular beverage preparation system (2) and the apparatus (system 2, Fig 1 and 3)) is in an operation configuration (Fig. 1-3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize in Fearnside et al., an intermodal shipping container housing the apparatus for processing a beverage and the apparatus (system 2) is in an operation configuration, as taught by Stenerhag et al., for the purpose of having the container is preferably of a size such that the beverage preparation module can be transported using a truck or trailer, or similar.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUNG D NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7828. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9AM - 9PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Edward Landrum can be reached at (571)272-5567. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HUNG D NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
HUNG D. NGUYEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights