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 .
Status of the Application
2. Claim 1-16 are in pending status.
Response to Arguments
3. The specification objection in regard to the title has been withdrawn based on the clarification provided in remarks filed on 5/22/26.
4. Applicant's arguments filed on 5/22/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s main argument is “Moreover, one of ordinary skill in the art would
readily understand Lehotay's sensors are not equivalent to the claimed load sensor arrangement because they serve fundamentally different purposes in Lehotay's system. Claim 1 requires a load sensor arrangement for sensing a grinder motor running parameter relating to a load experienced by the grinder motor, and further requires the processor to determine the amount of ground coffee based at least on that grinder motor running parameter. Lehotay's motor stall detection sensor (18) monitors motor operating parameters for state detection, not for quantitative measurement of the amount of ground coffee. In particular, Lehotay's motor stall detection sensor (18) uses the monitored operating parameters to determine discrete states of the coffee grinder (e.g., stall state, grinding state, ready state, no beans state). See Lehotay, para. [0017] and [0018]. In contrast, Lehotay's weight sensor (16) monitors the weight of the ground coffee and uses the weight measurement, not a motor operating parameter, to8
determine the amount of ground coffee. Here, the Office has improperly combined and conflated the motor-running parameter monitoring performed by the motor stall detection sensor (18) with the amount of ground coffee determination performed by the separate weight sensor (16). At most, Lehotay discloses using motor current or motor RPM to determine whether the motor has stalled, and using a separate weight sensor (16) to determine the amount of ground coffee” (Reamrks: Pages 7-8).
Applicants above argument is not persuasive and hence examiner is not agreed with the argument. In addition with previous cited Paragraphs of Lehotay, the Background/Summary of Lehotay further disclose “Other known coffee bean grinders monitor the electrical current running through the motor and conclude from the magnitude of the current drawn by the motor the absence of coffee beans in the hopper” (Para. [0004]). The amount of the coffee beans determination based on the current drawn by the motor is well known in the art as Per the Lehotay. Hence Lehotay either way (with using weight sensor or without using weight sensor) determine the amount of the coffee beans based on the current drawn by the motor. Therefor Lehotay’s teaching is clearly read on claimed limitation.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4-5, and 10 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.
Claim 12-14 are also objected due to its dependency over the claim 10.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
5. 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.
6. Claims 1-3, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) (1) as being anticipated by Lehotay (US PG Pub:2016/0256001).
7. Regarding claim 1, Lehotay discloses:
A control system for a coffee grinder, the coffee grinder comprising a hopper for containing coffee beans from which ground coffee can be dispensed and a grinder motor for grinding the coffee beans contained in the hopper (e.g., FIG. 1 schematically depicts a coffee bean grinder 10 including a grinding apparatus 12, a hopper 14, a weight sensor 16, a motor stall detection sensor 18, a user interface 20, a controller 22, and a receptacle 24. The coffee bean grinder 10 is designed to reduce the amount of time that the grinding apparatus 12 operates when the hopper 14 has no beans in it) (Para. [0009], Fig. 1),
the control system including: a load sensor (Fig. 1, motor stall detection sensor 18 is a load sensor) arrangement for sensing at least one grinder motor running parameter during a grinding operation in which coffee beans in the hopper is ground by the grinder motor to provide ground coffee, the grinder motor running parameter relating to a load experienced by the grinder motor during the grinding operation (e.g., The motor stall detection sensor 18 is associated with the motor 30 for monitoring at least one operating parameter of the motor 30. In one example, the motor stall detection sensor 18 is a current sensor that monitors current running through the motor 30. In an alternative embodiment, the motor stall detection sensor 18 can include a Hall-effect sensor configured to detect RPM of the output shaft 32 of the motor 30.) (Para. [0013]);
and a processor configured to determine (Fig. 1, controller 22 is interpreted as a processor), based at least on the grinder motor running parameter from the load sensor arrangement, an amount of ground coffee from the hopper during the grinding operation (e.g., At step 108, the controller 22 can determine whether a motor stall has been detected based on monitoring with the motor stall detection sensor 18, the operating parameter, e.g. the current drawn through the motor 30 or the RPM of the output shaft 32. If no motor stall is detected at step 108, then the method reverts back to providing voltage to the motor 30 at step 102. If a motor stall is detected at step 108, the state of the coffee bean grinder 10 is updated to the STALL state at step 112, and the controller 22 controls the display 40 to display an indication that a motor stall has occurred at step 114. The controller 22 then stops voltage to the motor 30, at step 116, thus protecting the motor 30 and any fuse between the power source and the motor 30.
With reference back to step 104, also during the GRINDING state, in addition to monitoring the operating parameter of the motor, at step 106, the weight of the coffee grounds that have been ground by the grinding apparatus 12 is monitored at step 120. This can be performed by measuring using the weight sensor 16 the weight of coffee grounds that have been ground by the grinding apparatus 12. The weight sensor 16 can be a load cell disposed beneath the receptacle 24 that collects the coffee grounds that have been ground by the grinding apparatus 12) (Para. [0020]-[0021], Fig. 2, also refer to Para. [0004] for the coffee amount determine based on the current drawn by the motor).
8. Regarding claim 2, Lehotay discloses:
The control system according to claim 1, wherein the grinder motor running parameter includes an electrical current or an electrical power for driving the grinder motor during the grinding operation, and the load sensor arrangement includes an electrical sensor for measuring the electrical current for driving the grinder motor (e.g., The motor stall detection sensor 18 is associated with the motor 30 for monitoring at least one operating parameter of the motor 30. In one example, the motor stall detection sensor 18 is a current sensor that monitors current running through the motor 30. In an alternative embodiment, the motor stall detection sensor 18 can include a Hall-effect sensor configured to detect RPM of the output shaft 32 of the motor 30.) (Para. [0013]);
and wherein the processor is configured to determine the amount of ground coffee from the hopper during the grinding operation based on an electrical current or electrical power measured by the electrical sensor over a period of time (e.g., The method for detecting a state of the coffee bean grinder will begin with the coffee bean grinder 10 in the READY state at step 100. At step 102, voltage is provided to the motor 30 from the power source (not shown). This typically occurs when an operator depresses an appropriate user input device 42 on the user interface 20 to start grinding coffee beans. While voltage is being provided to the motor 30, the state of the coffee bean grinder 10 updates to the GRINDING state at step 104. The controller 22 continuously monitors and updates the state of the coffee bean grinder 10. When in the GRINDING state, at step 106, the motor stall detection sensor 18 monitors at least one operating parameter of the motor 30. As mentioned above, the motor stall detection sensor 18 can be a current sensor. In this example, the operating parameter that is being monitored is current running through the motor 30. When the current draw through the motor 30 is much greater than a typical current draw, this indicates that the motor 30 is stalled. In another example, the motor stall detection sensor 18 is configured to detect RPM of the output shaft 32 of the motor 30. In this instance, the operating parameter that is being monitored is the RPM of the output shaft 32. When the RPM of the output shaft falls below a threshold (typically near zero), this provides an indication that the motor 30 is stalled.
At step 108, the controller 22 can determine whether a motor stall has been detected based on monitoring with the motor stall detection sensor 18, the operating parameter, e.g. the current drawn through the motor 30 or the RPM of the output shaft 32. If no motor stall is detected at step 108, then the method reverts back to providing voltage to the motor 30 at step 102. If a motor stall is detected at step 108, the state of the coffee bean grinder 10 is updated to the STALL state at step 112, and the controller 22 controls the display 40 to display an indication that a motor stall has occurred at step 114. The controller 22 then stops voltage to the motor 30, at step 116, thus protecting the motor 30 and any fuse between the power source and the motor 30) (Fig. 2, Para. [0019]-[0020]).
9. Regarding claim 3, Lehotay discloses:
The control system according to claim 1, wherein the grinder motor running parameter includes a motor speed of the grinder motor during the grinding operation, and the load sensor arrangement includes a speed sensor for measuring the motor speed of the grinder motor (e.g., the motor stall detection sensor 18 can include a Hall-effect sensor configured to detect RPM of the output shaft 32 of the motor 30.) (Para. [0013]);
and wherein the processor is configured to determine the amount of ground coffee from the hopper during the grinding operation based on the speed measured by the speed sensor with respect to at least one rotation of the grinder motor (e.g., ple, the operating parameter that is being monitored is current running through the motor 30. When the current draw through the motor 30 is much greater than a typical current draw, this indicates that the motor 30 is stalled. In another example, the motor stall detection sensor 18 is configured to detect RPM of the output shaft 32 of the motor 30. In this instance, the operating parameter that is being monitored is the RPM of the output shaft 32. When the RPM of the output shaft falls below a threshold (typically near zero), this provides an indication that the motor 30 is stalled.
[0020] At step 108, the controller 22 can determine whether a motor stall has been detected based on monitoring with the motor stall detection sensor 18, the operating parameter, e.g. the current drawn through the motor 30 or the RPM of the output shaft 32. If no motor stall is detected at step 108, then the method reverts back to providing voltage to the motor 30 at step 102. If a motor stall is detected at step 108, the state of the coffee bean grinder 10 is updated to the STALL state at step 112, and the controller 22 controls the display 40 to display an indication that a motor stall has occurred at step 114. The controller 22 then stops voltage to the motor 30, at step 116, thus protecting the motor 30 and any fuse between the power source and the motor 30) 9Para. [0019]-[0020], Fig. 2) .
10. Regarding claim 16, Lehotay discloses:
A coffee grinder comprising: a hopper for containing coffee beans from which ground coffee can be dispensed (e.g., a hopper 14) (Para. [0009], Fig. 1); a grinder motor for grinding the coffee beans contained in the hopper (e.g., The grinding apparatus includes a motor having an output shaft operatively connected with the grinding mechanism. The hopper is arranged with respect to the grinding apparatus for feeding coffee beans to the grinding apparatus) (Para. [0006]);
and the control system of claim 1 for determining an amount of ground coffee from the hopper during a grinding operation of the grinder motor, the control system being configured to control the grinder motor in response to a determined amount of ground coffee (Refer to Para. [0019]-[0020], [0024]-[0025]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
11. 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.
12. Claim 6-9, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lehotay in view of Knepler (Pub: 2003/0129286).
13. Regarding claim 6, Lehotay teaches the control system according to claim 3 but does not specifically teach wherein the speed sensor includes a sensor component that is locatable on one of a dynamic portion or a static portion of the coffee grinder and a reference component locatable on the other of the dynamic portion or static portion of the coffee grinder, wherein the motor speed or time can be determined in response to the sensor component detecting the reference component.
Knepler teaches wherein the speed sensor includes a sensor component that is locatable on one of a dynamic portion or a static portion of the coffee grinder and a reference component locatable on the other of the dynamic portion or static portion of the coffee grinder, wherein the motor speed or time can be determined in response to the sensor component detecting the reference component (e.g., Sensors 144a, 144b, 144c are carried on the brewing substance dispenser 122, such as a coffee grinder, or on the beverage maker 124, such as a coffee brewer, for sensing the setting selected by the user on the funnel 120 when the funnel 120 is mounted on apparatus such as the brewing substance dispenser 122 or on the beverage maker 124. As shown in the drawings for this embodiment, these sensors 144a, 144b, 144c take the form of three (3) Hall effect sensors 144a, 144b, 144c imbedded in a front wall 146 at predetermined positions of the brewing substance dispenser 122 or the beverage maker 124. The setting on the knob 138 is then wirelessly communicated to the controller of the brewing substance dispenser 122 or to the beverage maker 124, depending on which apparatus the funnel 120 is mounted, to determine a pre-programmed dispensing time, volume or weight. These sensors 144a, 144b, 144c are coupled to a respective controller which controls the operation of the respective apparatus 122 or 124.
When the funnel 120 is mounted on the brewing substance dispenser 122 or the beverage maker 124, the upper portion 134 of the handle 128 which extends upwardly from the uppermost edge of the body 126 and the portion of the rotatable knob 138 thereon align with the front wall 146 of the brewing substance dispenser 122 or the beverage maker 124 and the magnet, for example and as shown in the drawings for this embodiment, magnet 140, aligns with one of the Hall effect sensors, for example and as shown in the drawings for this embodiment, Hall effect sensor 144b. The Hall effect sensor 144b senses the presence of the magnet 140 and an appropriate voltage is sent to the controller of the brewing substance dispenser 122 which instructs the brewing substance dispenser 122 to grind an appropriate amount of coffee of a particular coffee type or to the control circuitry of the beverage maker 124 to brew an appropriate amount of coffee, depending on which component the funnel 120 is mounted) (Para. [0095], [0096], Fig. 10, 12).
Because Knepler is also directed to a brewing substance dispenser, beverage maker and funnel interface, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having teachings of Lehotay and Knepler before him/her, to modify the teachings of Lehotay to include the specific hall effect sensor and its component location teaching of Knepler in order to senses the presence of the magnet 140 and an appropriate voltage is sent to the controller of the brewing substance dispenser 122 which instructs the brewing substance dispenser 122 to grind an appropriate amount of coffee of a particular coffee type or to the control circuitry of the beverage maker 124 to brew an appropriate amount of coffee, depending on which component the funnel 120 is mounted (Para. [0096]).
14. Regarding claim 7, the combination of Lehotay and Knepler teaches the control system according to claim 6, wherein Knepler further teaches the sensor component is a Hall effect sensor, and the reference component is a magnet (e.g., When the funnel 120 is mounted on the brewing substance dispenser 122 or the beverage maker 124, the upper portion 134 of the handle 128 which extends upwardly from the uppermost edge of the body 126 and the portion of the rotatable knob 138 thereon align with the front wall 146 of the brewing substance dispenser 122 or the beverage maker 124 and the magnet, for example and as shown in the drawings for this embodiment, magnet 140, aligns with one of the Hall effect sensors, for example and as shown in the drawings for this embodiment, Hall effect sensor 144b. The Hall effect sensor 144b senses the presence of the magnet 140 and an appropriate voltage is sent to the controller of the brewing substance dispenser 122 which instructs the brewing substance dispenser 122 to grind an appropriate amount of coffee of a particular coffee type or to the control circuitry of the beverage maker 124 to brew an appropriate amount of coffee, depending on which component the funnel 120 is mounted) (Para. [0096]).
15. Regarding claim 8, the combination of Lehotay and Knepler teaches the control system according to claim 6, wherein Knepler further teaches the sensor component is an optical switch or a photosensor, and the reference component is an optical film (e.g., The sensors 144a, 144b, 144c; 192a, 192b, 192c, 192d provided in the brewing substance dispenser 122 and the beverage maker 124 can take a variety of forms. The sensors 144a, 144b, 144c; 192a, 192b, 192c, 192d can be effected by any of several different well-known methods of proximity detection, including magnetic, eddy current, capacitance, conductance, photoelectric, inductive, electromagnetic and infrared) (photoelectric sensor is also known as optical sensor (Para. [0115]).
16. Regarding claim 9, the combination of Lehotay and Knepler teaches the control system according to claim 6, wherein Knepler further teaches the speed sensor includes a plurality of spaced apart sensor components and/or a plurality of spaced apart reference components for detecting a partial rotation of the grinder motor (e.g., Sensors 144a, 144b, 144c are carried on the brewing substance dispenser 122, such as a coffee grinder, or on the beverage maker 124, such as a coffee brewer, for sensing the setting selected by the user on the funnel 120 when the funnel 120 is mounted on apparatus such as the brewing substance dispenser 122 or on the beverage maker 124. As shown in the drawings for this embodiment, these sensors 144a, 144b, 144c take the form of three (3) Hall effect sensors 144a, 144b, 144c imbedded in a front wall 146 at predetermined positions of the brewing substance dispenser 122 or the beverage maker 124. The setting on the knob 138 is then wirelessly communicated to the controller of the brewing substance dispenser 122 or to the beverage maker 124, depending on which apparatus the funnel 120 is mounted, to determine a pre-programmed dispensing time, volume or weight. These sensors 144a, 144b, 144c are coupled to a respective controller which controls the operation of the respective apparatus 122 or 124) (Para. [0095], Fig. 10, 12).
17. Regarding claim 11, the combination of Lehotay and Knepler teaches the control system according to claim 8, wherein Knepler further teaches the processor is further configured to: receive a user input relating to a desired amount of ground coffee (e.g., The coffee bean grinder 10 can also be configured to allow a user to input the desired amount of coffee to be ground) (Para. [0023]); discontinue the grinding operation when an accumulated amount value of ground coffee is determined to reach the desired amount of ground coffee (e.g., The actual weight is then compared to the selected weight of ground coffee to be produced, and the control circuit stops the grinding mechanism when the measured weight equals the selected weight) (Para. [0003]).
18. Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lehotay in view of Knepler (Hereinafter Known as “Knepler 1”) (Pat: 5462236).
19. Regarding claim 15, Lehotay teaches the control system according to claim 1, but does not specifically teach wherein the processor is further configured to: determine the amount of ground coffee from the hopper during the grinding operation in response to at least one characteristic of the coffee beans in the hopper.
Knepler1 teaches wherein the processor is further configured to: determine the amount of ground coffee from the hopper during the grinding operation in response to at least one characteristic of the coffee beans in the hopper (e.g., With reference to FIGS. 2 and 3, the coffee grinding apparatus 20 operates so that a calibration is made to the apparatus to produce a more accurate weight of ground coffee. In use, a user selects (52) the desired grind time corresponding to the desired weight of ground coffee. The grind time is selected from a table (for example, Table 1 below) positioned in close proximity to the grinding apparatus 20. This table allows a user to operate the dispensers 26, 28 and the grinding mechanism 30 for an appropriate amount of time in relation to the desired fineness of grind to achieve the desired weight of ground coffee) (Col. 3, Ln. 29-39)
Because Knepler1 is also directed to the field of equipment for grinding coffee beans, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having teachings of Lehotay and Knepler1 before him/her, to modify the teachings of Lehotay to include the teaching of Knepler1 in order to calibrate the grinder to accurately produce the selected weight of ground coffee (Col. 1, Ln. 8-9).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tsuchida (Pub: 2023/0270280) disclose “That is, by measuring the time from when the current value of the first motor of the first grinder 5A becomes high after starting to grind beans, it is possible to calculate an amount of the beans ground by the first grinder 5A” (Para. [0366]).
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
/JIGNESHKUMAR C PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2116
Prosecution Insights