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 Group I, claims 1-8 in the reply filed on 12/16/2025 is acknowledged. Claims 10, 11 and 14 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Boyd et al. US 2002/0048621.
Regarding claim 1, Boyd discloses a container arranged for containing a precursor material for use with a machine for preparing a beverage, the container including a machine readable code storing preparation information for use with a preparation process performed by said machine ([0002], [0006], [0028], [0029]), the code comprising a plurality of elements, the elements of the code are arranged to be read sequentially as the container is rotated (the code elements are capable of being read sequentially as the container is rotated) (Figs. 1-4). Boyd discloses that the code elements are arranged to be asymmetric about an axis R that extends in a radial direction from the axis of rotation, the asymmetric arrangement capable of indicating a particular direction of rotation (the extension of the 1 is capable of indicating a direction) (Fig. 2C, [0011]).
Regarding claim 7, Boyd discloses that the elements are physically arranged as a numeral 1 or 0 to encode a logical 1 or a 0, wherein the top end of the 1 includes an extension to provide said asymmetric arrangement (Fig. 2C, [0011]).
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 2-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boyd US 2002/004862 in view of Murphy US 2002/0014531 in view of Weinstock US 5,718,457 in view of Murray US 2011/0180604.
Regarding claim 2, claim 2 differs from Boyd in that the code elements are arrow shaped to indicate a direction of rotation. It is noted that Boyd discloses that that the particular code elements can be selected based on ability to store data, aesthetic, appearance and ability to carry machine interpretable data ([0029).
Murphy discloses providing code elements that are shaped to indicate a direction of rotation ([0049], [0043]). Murphy discloses that the code elements can be numbers, lines or geometric shapes (claim 17, part c). Murphy discloses that the code elements are arranged to be read sequentially as the container is rotated about an axis of rotation (Figs. 2a, 2b, [0035]-[0037]). Murphy discloses that the arrangement of the code elements indicates a particular direction of rotation ([0046]-[0049], [0043]). Murray discloses that when the direction of rotation has been determined, the reading of encoded data may begin ([0048]).
Weinstock discloses an optical readable code symbol for marking objects includes arrow shaped code symbols (Fig. 6) (it is noted that Fig. 5 can be considered an arrow shape).
Additionally, Murray discloses that the shape, and/or size or the position of the code element can comprise part of the coded information ([0022]), including positioning the code element (color encoded field) non-symmetrically in terms of at least one axis ([0022], [0023]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the code elements of Boyd to be arrow shaped as suggested by Weinstock, where the shape and arrangement indicates the direction of rotation as suggested by Murphy and include a non-symmetrical arrangement as suggested by Murray in order to suitably indicate a desired direction of rotation for the container of Boyd. It has been held that “Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results” supports a conclusion of obviousness (MPEP 2143.I.A).
Regarding claim 3, Modified Boyd discloses that a leading edge of the arrow shape is linear (‘457, Figs. 5, 6)
Regarding claim 4, Modified Boyd discloses that the trailing edge of the arrow shape corresponds to the leading edge (‘457, Fig. 5).
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boyd US 2002/004862 in view of Murphy US 2002/0014531 in view of Murray US 2011/0180604.
Regarding claim 5, claim 5 differs from Boyd in the recitation that the code elements are rhomboid shaped.
It is noted that Boyd discloses that that the particular code elements can be selected based on ability to store data, aesthetic, appearance and ability to carry machine interpretable data ([0029).
Murphy discloses providing code elements that are shaped to indicate a direction of rotation ([0049], [0043]). Murphy discloses that the code elements can be numbers, lines or geometric shapes (claim 17, part c), and geometric shapes encompasses rhomboid shapes. Murphy discloses that the code elements are arranged to be read sequentially as the container is rotated about an axis of rotation (Figs. 2a, 2b, [0035]-[0037]). Murphy discloses that the arrangement of the code elements indicates a particular direction of rotation ([0046]-[0049], [0043]). Murray discloses that when the direction of rotation has been determined, the reading of encoded data may begin ([0048])
Additionally, Murray discloses that known code elements for encoding data include a rhomboid shape ([0022]). Murray discloses that the shape, and/or size or the position of the code element can comprise part of the coded information ([0022]), including positioning the code element (color encoded field) non-symmetrically in terms of at least one axis ([0022], [0023]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the code elements of Boyd to be rhomboid shaped and include a non-symmetrical arrangement as suggested by Murray and Murphy, where the shape and arrangement indicates the direction of rotation as suggested by Murphy in order to suitably indicate a desired direction of rotation for the container of Boyd. It has been held that “Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results” supports a conclusion of obviousness (MPEP 2143.I.A).
Regarding claim 6, since the prior art above suggests a rhomboid shape and a rhomboid conventionally has linear sides, it is obvious that a leading edge of the rhomboid is linear.
Claim 8 is are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boyd US 2002/004862 in view of Jarisch US 2013/0064929.
Regarding claim 8, Boyd teaches that the container includes a storage portion and a closing member which are connected at a flange (Fig. 1). Claim 8 differs from Boyd in the recitation that the code is readable from a side of the flange that comprises a lower surface.
Jarisch teaches applying codes to capsules, where the code is readable from a side of the flange that comprises a lower surface (Fig. 5, [0018]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Boyd such that the code is readable from a side of the flange that comprises a lower surface as taught by Jarisch, since it has been held that “Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results” and “Applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results” supports a conclusion of obviousness (MPEP 2143.I,A.D).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ASHLEY AXTELL whose telephone number is (571)270-0316. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00- 5:30.
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.
/A.A/
Ashley AxtellExaminer, Art Unit 1792
/VIREN A THAKUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1792