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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4 and 9-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Robinson (2014/0246459).
Regarding claim 1, Robinson discloses a tap body (see figures 6-9), comprising:
a tip (1000; see figure 9);
a beverage channel (1060) extending through the tap body (1030) to the tip (1000; see figures 6-9); and
one or more coolant channels (1052, 1054 and 1058) extending through the tap body and configured to permit a cooling medium (the coolant) to pass within the tip (1000; see figures 6-9).
Though Robinson fails to disclose the one or more coolant channels (1052, 1054 and 1058) configured to permit the cooling medium to pass within 10mm or less of the tip, Robinson discloses one or more coolant channels (1052, 1054 and 1058) configured to permit a cooling medium (the coolant) to pass within certain distance of the tip (1000; see figures 6-9), it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claim invention that the claimed within 10mm or less distance is just an obvious matter of routine optimization. In the instant case, Robinson discloses the general condition of the claim that the coolant channel configured to permit the coolant to pass within a certain distance of the tip. Therefore, the claimed within 10mm or less distance can be achieved through routine experimentation in order to optimized the heat transfer between the coolant and the beverage (see MPEP 2144.05 section II-A).
Regarding claim 3, Robinson discloses the one or more coolant channels (1052, 1054, 1058) include a coolant channel (1052) that traces at least a portion of the beverage channel (1062) within the tap body (1030) such that the cooling medium is permitted to pass within certain distance of at least the portion of the beverage channel (1016 and 1060; see figures 6-9).
Though Robinson fails to disclose the coolant channel permit the cooling medium to pass within 10mm or less of at least the portion of the beverage channel, Robinson discloses one or more coolant channels (1052, 1054, 1058) permits the cooling medium (the coolant) to pass within certain distance of at least the portion of the beverage channel (1062; see figures 6-9), it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claim invention that the claimed within 10mm or less distance is just an obvious matter of routine optimization. In the instant case, Robinson discloses the general condition of the claim that the coolant channel configured to permit the coolant to pass within certain distance of at least the portion of the beverage channel (see figures 6-9). Therefore, the claimed within 10mm or less distance can be achieved through routine experimentation in order to optimized the heat transfer between the coolant and the beverage (see MPEP 2144.05 section II-A).
Regarding claim 4, Robinson discloses the one or more coolant channels (1052, 1054 and 1058) include a coolant channel (1054) that coils (the channel coils) or spirals about at least a portion of the beverage channel (1016 and 1060) within the tap body (1030) such that the cooling medium (the coolant) is permitted to pass within certain distance of at least the portion of the beverage channel (1062; see figures 6-8).
Though Robinson fails to disclose the coolant channel permit the cooling medium to pass within 10mm or less of at least the portion of the beverage channel, Robinson discloses one or more coolant channels (1052, 1054 and 1058) permits the cooling medium (the coolant) to pass within certain distance of at least the portion of the beverage channel (1062; see figures 6-9), it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claim invention that the claimed within 10mm or less distance is just an obvious matter of routine optimization. In the instant case, Robinson discloses the general condition of the claim that the coolant channel configured to permit the coolant to pass within certain distance of at least the portion of the beverage channel (see figures 6-9). Therefore, the claimed within 10mm or less distance can be achieved through routine experimentation in order to optimized the heat transfer between the coolant and the beverage (see MPEP 2144.05 section II-A).
Regarding claim 9, Robinson discloses the one or more coolant channels (1052, 1054 and 1058) are configured to permit the cooling medium to pass within the tip (1000; see figures 8-9).
Though Robinson fails to disclose the one or more coolant channels configured to permit the cooling medium to pass within 5mm or less of the tip, Robinson discloses one or more coolant channels (1052, 1054 and 1058) configured to permit a cooling medium (the coolant) to pass within certain distance of the tip (1000; see figures 6-9), it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claim invention that the claimed within 10mm or less distance is just an obvious matter of routine optimization. In the instant case, Robinson discloses the general condition of the claim that the coolant channel configured to permit the coolant to pass within certain distance of the tip. Therefore, the claimed within 5mm or less distance can be achieved through routine experimentation in order to optimized the heat transfer between the coolant and the beverage (see MPEP 2144.05 section II-A).
Regarding claim 10, Robinson discloses the tap body (1030) includes or is configured to receive a drip diverter (1020) at the tip (1000; see figures 6-9).
Regarding claim 11, Robinson discloses the tap body (1030) further comprising a spout (1070) that includes the tip (1000; see figures 6-9).
Regarding claim 12, Robinson discloses the one or more coolant channels (1052, 1054 and 1058) include (a) a first coolant channel (1052) and (b) a second coolant channel (1054) fluidly coupled to the first coolant channel (1052) and positioned more proximate the tip (1000) than the first coolant channel (1052; see figures 6-9); and
the second coolant channel (1054) is configured to hold a greater amount of cooling medium than the first coolant channel (1052; see figures 6-9).
Regarding claim 13, Robinson discloses the second coolant channel (1054) surrounds a larger percentage of the beverage channel (1060 and 1062) within the tap body (1030) than the first coolant channel (1052; see figures 6-9).
Regarding claim 14, Robinson discloses in comparison with the first coolant channel (1052), the second coolant channel (1054) occupies a larger percentage of a volume of the tap body (1030) that is not occupied by the beverage channel (1060 and 1062; see figures 6-9).
Regarding claim 15, Robinson discloses the tap body (1030) is configured to receive a removable nozzle (1020; see figures 6-9).
Regarding claim 16, Robinson discloses the tap body (1030) includes a threaded protrusion (the thread which associated with the part 1018) configured to receive the removable nozzle (1020; see figures 8-9).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 5-8 and 17-20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The primary reference Robinson fails to discloses the claimed structure of the tap body as required in claims 2, 5-8 and 17-20. Also, the prior art of record fails to provide further teachings or motivation to modify the tap body of Robinson in order to arrive the claim invention. Therefore, claims 2, 5-8 and 17-20 are allowable over the prior art of record.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KUN KAI MA whose telephone number is (571)-270-3530. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9am-6pm.
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, Jianying Atkisson can be reached on 5712707740. 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.
/KUN KAI MA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763