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 .
Priority
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.
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 1-18 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 11, line 3 recites “said electrically insulating material”; claim 12, line 2 recites “said inner surface”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 1, line 10; claim 3, line 2; claim 5, line 3; claim 10, line 4; claim 11, line 3; claim 14, line 3; claim 15, line 4; claim 16, line 3; claim 17, line 2, the phrase "in particular" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Regarding claim 4, line 3; claim 12, line 3, the phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claims 2, 6-9, 11-13 and 18 are also rejected because they are dependent upon claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 1-3, 5-11, 13 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Jaccard (WO2013/041391) in view of Weiliang (CN110154409) or Krups (DE7124870). An English machine translation of Weiliang (CN110154409) and Krups (DE7124870) is included with the Notice of Reference Cited (PTO-892).
With respect to the limitations of claim 1, Jaccard teaches device, in particular a flow through heater (Abstract, flow through heating element 1), for a machine for preparing hot beverages (Title, heater for beverage preparation machines), the device comprising a metal body (Fig 3, metallic sleeve 2, Pg 10, Lines 1-5); at least one electric heater (Figs 1-3, inner sleeve 4, wired electrical resistance 12, heat conducting material 11, Pg 7, Lines 8-15) arranged in the metal body (2); a conduit for the passage of an edible liquid to be heated (channel 3, groove 30, Pg 7, Lines 10-25), in particular water (Pg 4, Lines 8-12); said conduit is delimited by a first inner surface of the metal body (inner surface of metallic sleeve 2, Fig 3); said first inner surface is coated with a coating layer (PTFE, Teflon, Pg 8, Lines 23-28; Claim 10), in particular suitable for food contact, adapted to contact the edible liquid to be heated, in particular adapted to be wet by the edible liquid to be heated. Jaccard discloses the claimed invention except for said coating layer is substantially made of one of the following materials: Polyamide (PA), Perfluoroalkoxy (PFA), fluorinated ethylene propylene (FEP), Polyurethane (PU), a polyester, a silicone, or sol-gel.
However, Weiliang discloses that PTFE and PFA are known fluoropolymers that are suitable for use as tube liners (0017). It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adapt the flow through heater device of Jaccard having a PTFE liner silent to PFA with the PFA liner of Weiliang for the purpose of using a known fluoropolymer alternative material that is suitable for tube liners with good overall high temperature performance (0017, 0018).
Additionally, Krups discloses using a silicone liner (Fig 3, inner layer 28, made of silicon or polytetrafluoroethylene 0016, 0017) is known in the art. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adapt the flow through heater device of Jaccard having a PTFE liner silent to silicone with the silicone liner of Krups for the purpose of using a known alternative material that is suitable for tube liners that is resistance to leachate and have less limescale build-up during operation of the device (0017).
With respect to the limitations of claim 2, Jaccard discloses the claimed invention except for said metal body is made of aluminum or aluminum alloy. However, Jaccard discloses that using materials such as aluminum (Pg 4, Lines 29-30, internal channel 3 which is made up of a metal such as brass, copper, steel, aluminum) is known in the art. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adapt the flow through heater device of Jaccard having a metal body silent to the material with said metal body is made of aluminum or aluminum alloy of Jaccard for the purpose of using a known metal material that is resistant to water corrosion and suitable for flow through heater applications.
With respect to the limitations of claims 3, 8, 10, 11, 13 and 18, Jaccard teaches said metal body is a monolithic body (metallic sleeve 2 in the form of a single sleeve), in particular obtained by extrusion;
said conduit has one or more curved stretch (Fig 2, helical, curved path of (channel 3, groove 30);
said at least one electric heater comprises at least one electric resistor (Fig 3, resistive wire 12, Pg 4, Lines 16-28) embedded in an electrically insulating material (filling material 11, magnesium oxide, Pg 4, Lines 23-25); said electrically insulating material is in contact, in particular directly in contact, with a second inner surface (inner sleeve 4, Pg 7) of the metal body;
said coating layer is adapted to ensure an electrical insulation, in particular an additional electrical insulation (PTFE, Teflon, Pg 8, Lines 23-28; Claim 10) with respect to said electrically insulating material, between said at least one electric heater (inner sleeve 4, wired electrical resistance 12) and the edible liquid flowing in the conduit (Pg 4, Lines 8-12);
said at least one electric heater (length of inner sleeve 4, wired electrical resistance 12) and said conduit extend parallel (length of channel 3, groove 30) to each other;
machine for preparing beverages (Pg 4, Lines 8-11, such flow through heating elements are generally used to 10 heat water in beverage preparation machines) comprising a device according to claim 1 (as set forth in the rejection of claim 1 above).
With respect to the limitations of claims 5, 6 and 7, Jaccard in view of Weiliang or Krups discloses said coating layer has a lower electrical conductivity (Weilang, PFA; Krups, silicone) than the electrical conductivity of said metal body (Jaccard, metal and/or aluminum); in particular wherein the electrical conductivities are assessed under the same conditions;
said coating layer is made of a material which is suitable for food contact (Weilang, PFA; Krups, silicone);
said coating layer is made of a material approved for food contact (Weilang, PFA; Krups, silicone).
With respect to the limitations of claim 9, Jaccard in view of Weiliang discloses said coating layer is substantially made of Polyamide (PA) (Weiliang, 0017, polyamide plastic pipe (PA)).
Claims 3, 12 and 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Jaccard (WO2013/041391) in view of Weiliang (CN110154409) or Krups (DE7124870) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Hillinger (DE3542507).
With respect to the limitations of claim 3, Jaccard in view of Weiliang or Krups discloses the claimed invention except for explicitly showing said metal body is a monolithic body, in particular obtained by extrusion. However, Hillinger discloses said metal body is a monolithic body, in particular obtained by extrusion (Figs 1-3, extruded part 1 made of aluminum, 0012, where the extruded part 1 is a monolithic body) is known in the art. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adapt the flow through heater device of Jaccard in view of Weiliang or Krups having a metal body silent to a monolithic body with said metal body is a monolithic body, in particular obtained by extrusion of Hillinger for the purpose of providing a known metal body configuration that has an easy-to-manufacture design, and where the instantaneous water heater makes it possible to accommodate large heating sections in a relatively small space (0007).
With respect to the limitations of claims 12, 14, 15, 16 and 17, Jaccard in view of Weilang or Krups and Hillinger discloses said first inner surface (Hillinger, Figs 1-3, flow channel 2, 0012) and said second inner surface (Hillinger, bore 3, 0012) are continuous surfaces which extend about a respective axis; preferably wherein said first inner surface and said second inner surface have a circular section (helical design, 0007; circular cross-section);
said conduit has an inner diameter (Hillinger, bore 3);
the metal body comprises a first end portion and a second end portion (Hillinger, water heater 1, integrated supports 7 for house connections, 0016), delimiting an initial stretch and a final stretch of said conduit (Hillinger, flow channel 2), respectively, and in particular form a respective portion of said inner surface; wherein the first end portion and the second end portion are adapted to be inserted into a respective tube (Hillinger, 0016);
said conduit has a greater length (Hillinger, flow channel 2) than the length of said at least one electric heater (Hillinger, heating element 4, 0012); in particular so that the first end portion and the second end portion are adapted to be inserted into the respective tube (Hillinger, 0016);
each end portion protrudes, in particular outwards (Hillinger, water heater 1, integrated supports 7 for house connections, 0016), with respect to the end of the at least one electric heater being proximal thereto (Hillinger, heating element 4, 0012).
Jaccard in view of Weilang or Krups and Hillinger discloses the claimed invention except for said conduit has an inner diameter from 2 to 10 mm; preferably from 4 to 7 mm. However, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to have said conduit has an inner diameter from 2 to 10 mm; preferably from 4 to 7 mm, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable dimensional ranges involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04)
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Jaccard (WO2013/041391) in view of Weiliang (CN110154409) or Krups (DE7124870) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Picone (EP0881859).
With respect to the limitations of claim 4, Jaccard discloses that the coating layer has a small thickness (Pg 9, Lines claim 10). Jaccard in view of Weiliang or Krups discloses the claimed invention except for said coating layer has a thickness from 2 to 100 μm; preferably from 5 to 25 μm. However, Picone disclose said coating layer (Fig 2, layer 13, Pg 3, Col 4) has a thickness from 2 to 100 μm; preferably from 5 to 25 μm (Pg 3, Col 4, Lines 40-45, a thickness of several microns) is known in the art. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adapt the flow through heater device of Jaccard in view of Weiliang or Krups having a coating layer silent to the coating thickness with said coating layer has a thickness from 2 to 100 μm; preferably from 5 to 25 μm of Picone for the purpose of using a known coating thickness that enables the conduit to be effectively protected against corrosion, abrasion and limestone build-up (Pg 3, Col 4, Lines 40-45).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THIEN S TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7745. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday [8:00-4:00].
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, Steven Crabb can be reached at 571-270-5095. 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.
/THIEN S TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761 9/2/2026
Prosecution Insights