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 .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed July 19th, 2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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.
Claim 15 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.
Regarding claim 15, “a liquid line (105)” contradicts “a fluid line (105).” It is unclear if the liquid line is different from the fluid line as both are designated with the same number. Examiner suggests using consistent language for the sake of clarity. For the purpose of this examination , the liquid line (105) is interpreted to be the same as the fluid line (105).
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.
Claims 1-12 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Novak et al. US-20130129870-A1 in view of Sawyer et al. US-20200156019-A1 and in further view of Bromes et al. US-20160354734-A1.
Regarding claim 1, Novak et al. teaches a device for mixing a beverage with a gas represented by beverage making system 1 (Fig. 1, [0095]). The beverage making system 1 comprises of the following elements of the current invention:
A gas providing unit represented by carbon dioxide source 41 (Fig. 1, [0097]).
A gas cartridge comprising a gas at a first pressure represented by cartridge 4 that “may be used with any suitable gas” (Fig. 1, [0097]).
A gas line connected or connectable with the gas providing unit and configured to be connectable with a liquid container, such that the gas is feedable in the liquid container via the gas line represented by conduits in Figure 1 such that “gas from the cartridge may be routed to an area where the gas is dissolved in the liquid, e.g…a reservoir that holds a substantial portion of the liquid” (Fig. 1, [0019]).
A liquid container represented by reservoir 11 (Fig. 1, [0095]).
Novak et al. does not teach a pressure indication device fluidically connectable with the gas cartridge, where in the pressure indication device is configured to be at least in a first or second state when quantity of gas in the gas cartridge is respectively above or below a pre-defined threshold.
Sawyer et al. teaches a pressure indication device fluidically connectable with the gas cartridge, where in the pressure indication device is configured to be at least in a first or second state when quantity of gas in the gas cartridge is respectively above or below a pre-defined threshold represented by “flow valve 152 may include a processor (e.g. microcontroller) that toggles the state of one or more solenoids in response to determining that pressure readings received from one or more pressure sensors indicates a system gas pressure which exceeds the predetermined threshold. An advantage of this design is that the processor can be reprogrammed with different predetermined thresholds” (Fig. 3, [0109]). The pressure sensors being programmed with predetermined thresholds are beneficial to help monitor and control the quantity of gas in the gas cartridge to ensure a consistent product is being produced.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Novak et al. to incorporate the teachings of Sawyer et al. to include pressure sensors connected to the gas cartridge with first and second states to help monitor and control the quantity of gas in the gas cartridge to ensure a consistent product is being produced.
Novak et al. in view of Sawyer et al. fails to teach the gas cartridge being a gas cylinder comprising the gas at a first pressure.
Bromes et al. teaches the gas cartridge being a gas cylinder comprising the gas at a first pressure represented by a bottle or cylinder 6 of pressurized gas (Fig. 1, [0044]). It is well known in the art that cylindrical shapes are beneficial as they can withstand high internal pressures more effectively than other shapes.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Novak et al. in view of Sawyer et al. to incorporate the teachings of Bromes et al. to the gas cartridge being a gas cylinder comprising the gas at a first pressure to effectively withstand high internal pressures.
Regarding claim 2, Novak et al. in view of Sawyer et al. teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
Novak et al. in view of Sawyer et al. does not teach a pressure reducer configured to reduce the pressure from the first pressure to a second pressure lower than the first pressure.
Bromes et al. teaches a pressure reducer configured to reduce the pressure from the first pressure to a second pressure lower than the first pressure represented by pressure-reducer 26 “being configured for adapting the pressure of the gas” (Claim 35, [0037]). The pressure reducer is beneficial to as it helps maintain the pressure in the gas cartridge without intervention allowing for a consistent product.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Novak et al. in view of Sawyer et al. to incorporate the teachings of Bromes et al. to include a pressure reducer to help maintain the pressure in the gas cartridge without intervention allowing for a consistent product.
Regarding claim 3, the pressure indication device being integrated or integrable in the pressure reducer is merely a design choice. The courts have previously ruled that matters of obvious engineering choice, such as parts being integrated, are valid rejections, in re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965) (see MPEP 2144.04).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to have made the pressure indication device integrated or integrable in the pressure reducer for the simplification of the device.
Regarding claim 4, Novak et al. teaches the pressure indication device configured to determine the first pressure in real-time represented by “sensor 51 may include a pressure sensor used to detect a pressure” (Fig. 1, [102]).
Regarding claim 5, Novak et al. teaches the pressure indication device comprising of an electro -mechanical switch represented by the following ”…sensor 51, which may represent one or more sensors used by the controller 5….controller 5, which may include…switches” (Fig. 1, [0102]).
Regarding claim 6, Novak et al. teaches a first or second analysis device configured to determine a state of the pressure indication device represented by controller 5 “which may include a programmed general purpose computer and/or other data processing device along with suitable software or other operating instructions, one or more memories (including non-transient storage media that may store software and/or other operating instructions), a power supply for the controller 5 and/or other system components, temperature and liquid level sensors, pressure sensors, RFID interrogation devices, input/output interfaces (e.g., to display information to a user and/or receive input from a user), communication buses or other links, a display, switches, relays, triacs, motors, mechanical linkages and/or actuators, or other components necessary to perform desired input/output or other functions” (Fig. 1, [0102]).
Regarding claim 7, Novak et al. teaches the first or second analysis device configured for recording, processing, or storing data provided by the pressure indication device represented by controller 5 “which may include a programmed general purpose computer and/or other data processing device along with suitable software or other operating instructions, one or more memories (including non-transient storage media that may store software and/or other operating instructions), a power supply for the controller 5 and/or other system components, temperature and liquid level sensors, pressure sensors, RFID interrogation devices, input/output interfaces (e.g., to display information to a user and/or receive input from a user), communication buses or other links, a display, switches, relays, triacs, motors, mechanical linkages and/or actuators, or other components necessary to perform desired input/output or other functions” (Fig. 1, [0102]).
Regarding claim 8, Novak et al. teaches the first or second analysis device configured to estimate available mass of gas in the gas providing unit based on the pressure indication device represented by controller 5 “which may include a programmed general purpose computer and/or other data processing device along with suitable software or other operating instructions, one or more memories (including non-transient storage media that may store software and/or other operating instructions), a power supply for the controller 5 and/or other system components, temperature and liquid level sensors, pressure sensors, RFID interrogation devices, input/output interfaces (e.g., to display information to a user and/or receive input from a user), communication buses or other links, a display, switches, relays, triacs, motors, mechanical linkages and/or actuators, or other components necessary to perform desired input/output or other functions” (Fig. 1, [0102]).
Regarding claim 9, Novak et al. teaches the first or second analysis device configured to estimate the available mass of gas in the gas providing unit based on a time elapsed since a previous use of the device represented by controller 5 “which may include a programmed general purpose computer and/or other data processing device along with suitable software or other operating instructions, one or more memories (including non-transient storage media that may store software and/or other operating instructions), a power supply for the controller 5 and/or other system components, temperature and liquid level sensors, pressure sensors, RFID interrogation devices, input/output interfaces (e.g., to display information to a user and/or receive input from a user), communication buses or other links, a display, switches, relays, triacs, motors, mechanical linkages and/or actuators, or other components necessary to perform desired input/output or other functions” (Fig. 1, [0102]).
Regarding claim 10, Novak et al. teaches the first or second analysis device configured to estimate the available mass of gas in the gas providing unit based on a time elapsed since a previous change of the state of the pressure indication device represented by controller 5 “which may include a programmed general purpose computer and/or other data processing device along with suitable software or other operating instructions, one or more memories (including non-transient storage media that may store software and/or other operating instructions), a power supply for the controller 5 and/or other system components, temperature and liquid level sensors, pressure sensors, RFID interrogation devices, input/output interfaces (e.g., to display information to a user and/or receive input from a user), communication buses or other links, a display, switches, relays, triacs, motors, mechanical linkages and/or actuators, or other components necessary to perform desired input/output or other functions” (Fig. 1, [0102]).
Regarding claim 11, Novak et al. teaches the device configured to output a signal when the available mass of gas in the gas providing cartridge is smaller than a pre-defined value represented by controller 5 “which may include a programmed general purpose computer and/or other data processing device along with suitable software or other operating instructions, one or more memories (including non-transient storage media that may store software and/or other operating instructions), a power supply for the controller 5 and/or other system components, temperature and liquid level sensors, pressure sensors, RFID interrogation devices, input/output interfaces (e.g., to display information to a user and/or receive input from a user), communication buses or other links, a display, switches, relays, triacs, motors, mechanical linkages and/or actuators, or other components necessary to perform desired input/output or other functions” (Fig. 1, [0102]).
Regarding claim 12, Novak et al. teaches the device configured to output a signal when the available mass of gas in the gas providing cartridge is smaller than a pre-defined value and a time elapsed since a previous use of the device is longer than a pre-defined recovery time represented by controller 5 “which may include a programmed general purpose computer and/or other data processing device along with suitable software or other operating instructions, one or more memories (including non-transient storage media that may store software and/or other operating instructions), a power supply for the controller 5 and/or other system components, temperature and liquid level sensors, pressure sensors, RFID interrogation devices, input/output interfaces (e.g., to display information to a user and/or receive input from a user), communication buses or other links, a display, switches, relays, triacs, motors, mechanical linkages and/or actuators, or other components necessary to perform desired input/output or other functions” (Fig. 1, [0102]).
Regarding claim 15, Novak et al. as modified teaches all the limitation of claim 1, as explained above.
Novak et al. differs from claim 15 as the reference teaches the device comprising of a single gas line connectable with the gas providing unit. Therefore, the reference is silent as to a further gas line, which is connected or connectable with the gas providing unit and fluidically connected with a fluid line.
However, Novak et al. teaches the device may have “various embodiments and optional features described herein may be used with this aspect of the invention” and that ” increased acidity of the liquid 2 in the reservoir 11 may also help reduce scale build up and/or bacterial growth in the reservoir” (Novak et al. [0019, 0156]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include an additional gas line connected to the gas providing unit and be fluidically connected with a fluid line because the system may have various embodiments. Utilizing two gas lines would merely represent obvious duplication of parts. Connecting the additional gas line upstream of carbonation to increase acidity would have been beneficial to reduce scale build up and bacterial growth in the liquid container.
Regarding claim 16, the pressure indication device being integrated or integrable in a part of the pressure reducer where the first pressure prevails is merely a design choice. The courts have previously ruled that matters of obvious engineering choice, such as parts being integrated, are valid rejections, in re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965) (see MPEP 2144.04).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to have made the pressure indication device integrated or integrable in the pressure reducer for the simplification of the device.
Regarding claim 17, Novak et al. teaches a first or second analysis device configured to determine a state of the pressure indication device represented by controller 5 “which may include a programmed general purpose computer and/or other data processing device along with suitable software or other operating instructions, one or more memories (including non-transient storage media that may store software and/or other operating instructions), a power supply for the controller 5 and/or other system components, temperature and liquid level sensors, pressure sensors, RFID interrogation devices, input/output interfaces (e.g., to display information to a user and/or receive input from a user), communication buses or other links, a display, switches, relays, triacs, motors, mechanical linkages and/or actuators, or other components necessary to perform desired input/output or other functions” (Fig. 1, [0102]).
Claims 13, 14, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Novak et al. US-20130129870-A1 in view of Sawyer et al. US-20200156019-A1 and in further view of Bromes et al. US-20160354734-A1 and in further view of Kirschner et al. US-20140322409-A1.
Regarding claim 13, Novak et al. in view of Sawyer et al. and in further view of Bromes et al. teaches all the limitations of claim 6.
Novak et al. in view of Sawyer et al. and in further view of Bromes et al. does not teach the device comprising an external device or the device being configured to communicate with an external device where in the external device is configured to receive a signal and/or data of the device and where in the external device is configured to initiate a subsequent process.
Kirshner et al. teaches device the comprising an external device or the device being configured to communicate with an external device where in the external device is configured to receive a signal and/or data of the device and where in the external device is configured to initiate a subsequent process represented by “the beverage making machine 100 can data communicate by way of a computer control, such as computer control 122 or other types and/or kinds of computer control across a global network 604 with data processing resources 606. Data processing resources 606 can be websites, online stores, and factory ordering systems, servers, mobile devices, computer networks, and/or other types and kinds of data processing resources, as may be required and/or desired in a particular embodiment. Such data communications can include ordering supplies, such as supplies 504, checking inventory, transacting business in an online account, data communicating market information, beverage data, inventory data, service needs, and other types and kinds of data communications, as may be required and/or desired in a particular embodiment. Supplies 504 can include various types and kinds of beverage making cartridges 200” (Fig. 18, [0210]). The device being configured in this manner is beneficial to help ensure the device maintenance is easily accessible and manageable.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Novak et al. in view of Sawyer et al. and in further view of Bromes et al. to incorporate the teachings of Kirshner et al. to configure the device to communicate with an external device to create a network for easier maintenance and accessibility of the device.
Regarding claim 14, Kirshner teaches the device being able to initiate an order of a new gas cartridge based on the amount of gas cartridges consumed since the last order represented by “the beverage making machine 100 can selectively be programmed to trigger the reorder condition based on the needs and preferences of the consumer including, but not limited to, allowing the beverage making machine 100 to determine when a supply needs to be reordered and automatically placing a resupply order by way of a global network 604.” (Kirshner [0317]). The device being configured in this manner is beneficial to ensure the device never runs out of gas cartridges and is always operable.
Regarding claim 18, Novak et al. in view of Sawyer et al. and in further view of Bromes et al. teaches all the limitations of claim 6.
Novak et al. in view of Sawyer et al. and in further view of Bromes et al. does not teach the device comprising an external device or the device being configured to communicate with an external device where in the external device is configured to receive a signal and/or data of the device and where in the external device is configured to initiate a subsequent process, particularly where in the subsequent process comprises at least one of the following: initiating an order of a new gas cartridge, switching a light on, switching a light off, showing a text, sending a text message, activating an application.
Kirshner et al. teaches device the comprising an external device or the device being configured to communicate with an external device where in the external device is configured to receive a signal and/or data of the device and where in the external device is configured to initiate a subsequent process, particularly where in the subsequent process comprises at least one of the following: initiating an order of a new gas cartridge, switching a light on, switching a light off, showing a text, sending a text message, activating an application represented by “the beverage making machine 100 can data communicate by way of a computer control, such as computer control 122 or other types and/or kinds of computer control across a global network 604 with data processing resources 606. Data processing resources 606 can be websites, online stores, and factory ordering systems, servers, mobile devices, computer networks, and/or other types and kinds of data processing resources, as may be required and/or desired in a particular embodiment. Such data communications can include ordering supplies, such as supplies 504, checking inventory, transacting business in an online account, data communicating market information, beverage data, inventory data, service needs, and other types and kinds of data communications, as may be required and/or desired in a particular embodiment. Supplies 504 can include various types and kinds of beverage making cartridges 200” (Fig. 18, [0210]). The device being configured in this manner is beneficial to help ensure the device maintenance is easily accessible and manageable.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Novak et al. in view of Sawyer et al. and in further view of Bromes et al. to incorporate the teachings of Kirshner et al. to configure the device to communicate with an external device to create a network for easier maintenance and accessibility of the device.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 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.
Regarding claim 1, the new grounds rejection is necessitated due to amendments made by the Applicant. The amendments filed July 19th, 2026 additionally limit the gas cartridge of claim 1. Therefore, a new grounds rejection is made using 35 USC § 103.
Furthermore, the pressure indication device of Sawyer et al. clearly teaches it can be “reprogramed with different predetermined thresholds.” Therefore, the pressure indication device can inherently be programmed to the first and second state as described by current invention.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMMAD BUTT whose telephone number is (571)272-6550. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th, 7-5PM.
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, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached at (571) 270-7872. 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.
/AMMAD W BUTT/
Examiner, Art Unit 1776
/Jennifer Dieterle/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1776
Prosecution Insights