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 2/4/26 is acknowledged. Claims 9-21 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
35 USC § 102 Rejection
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.
Claims 1, 4, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ikeda (JP H10-236452).
Regarding claim 1, Ikeda discloses a bottle for a beverage mixing machine, comprising:
a floor (bottom 3);
at least one side wall (sides 3) extending upwardly from the floor; and
a neck (8, 3a) extending upwardly from the side wall;
wherein the neck includes at least one magnet (10, 12a, 12b) at least partially embedded therein (magnets are fitted within annular recess 8).
Regarding claim 4, in addition to the limitations in claim 1, Ikeda further discloses wherein the at least one magnet is two magnets (12a, 12b), and wherein the two magnets are located diametrically opposite each other.
Regarding claim 6, in addition to the limitations in claim 1, Ikeda further discloses a lid (4) that fits over the neck (Fig. 2).
35 USC § 103 Rejection
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 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikeda (JP H10-236452) in view of Matsuoka et al (US 7,699,183).
Regarding claim 2, in addition to the limitations in claim 1, Ikeda does not expressly disclose wherein the at least one side wall is four side walls, and wherein the side walls are arranged so that the bottle has a generally square footprint. However, Matsuoka teaches wherein the at least one side wall is four side walls (11), and wherein the side walls are arranged so that the bottle has a generally square footprint (Fig. 4a). Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify Ideda’s bottle having a circular footprint, to have a generally square footprint as taught by Matsuoka, in order to provide the appearance and functionality of a square bottle along with favorable gripping characteristics (2:11-14).
Regarding claim 3, in addition to the limitations in claim 1, Ikeda does not expressly disclose wherein the at least one side wall is four side walls, and wherein the side walls are arranged so that the bottle has a generally rectangular footprint. However, Matsuoka teaches wherein the at least one side wall is four side walls (11), and wherein the side walls are arranged so that the bottle has a generally square footprint (Fig. 4a). It should be noted that a square is at type of rectangle. Merriam-Webster defines a “rectangle” as “a four-sided shape that is made up of two pairs of parallel lines and that has four right angles.” Said another way, a square is a type of rectangle. Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify Ideda’s bottle having a circular footprint, to have a generally rectangular (square) footprint as taught by Matsuoka, in order to provide the appearance and functionality of a square bottle along with favorable gripping characteristics (2:11-14).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikeda (JP H10-236452) in view of De Bortoli et al (FR 2986783).
Regarding claim 5, in addition to the limitations in claim 1, Ikeda discloses a bottle having one or more magnets embedded in the neck for magnetic interaction with a mixing machine. Ikeda does not expressly disclose wherein the at least one magnet is four magnets, and wherein the four magnets are located at approximately 90 degree intervals about the neck. However, De Bortoli teaches a magnetic closure system for a container, wherein the at least one magnet is four magnets (Figs. 2 & 5, items 22, Z1-Z4), and wherein the four magnets are located at approximately 90 degree intervals about the neck (Figs. 2 & 5). Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the bottle of Ikedo, by providing four circumferentially arranged magnetic regions (instead of Ikeda’s two) about the neck as taught by De Bortoli, to improve magnetic indexing and rotational positioning between the bottle and the associated machine while maintaining predictable magnetic coupling. Such modification merely substitutes one known circumferential magnetic configuration for another and represents the predictable use of known magnetic positioning techniques to achieve the expected benefit of improved alignment.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikeda (JP H10-236452) in view of Ballew (US 2024/0252999).
Regarding claim 7, in addition to the limitations in claim 1, Ikeda does not expressly disclose a rotatable stirrer rotatably mounted to the floor. However, Ballew teaches a rotatable stirrer (80) rotatably mounted to the floor (29). Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the bottle of Ikedo, to include the rotatable stirrer of Ballew, to facilitate mixing of beverage ingredients within the bottle.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikeda (JP H10-236452) in view of Ammar (US 9,861,554).
Regarding claim 8, in addition to the limitations in claim 1, Ikeda does not expressly disclose a ring indicator that encircles the neck of the bottle, the ring indicator including indicia configured to indicate a parameter regarding the contents of the bottle. However, Ammar teaches a ring indicator (26; the examiner notes that the claimed “ring indicator” is interpreted as an indicator assembly comprising the ring and the associated indicia that cooperate to convey information) that encircles the neck of the bottle, the ring indicator including indicia (24) configured to indicate a parameter regarding the contents of the bottle (3:13-22). Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the bottle of Ikedo, to include an indicator ring, to communicate information regarding the bottle contents to the user.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SPE DAVID ANGWIN whose telephone number is (571)-270- 3735. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-5 EST. 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 https://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. 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.
/DAVID P ANGWIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3754
Prosecution Insights