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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
- “brewing means” in claim 1 line 4 and claim 11 line 5, wherein the disclosure provides the following corresponding structure: brewing unit 15 with brewing chamber 16 as shown in Figure 1 to Figure 3.
- “hydraulic means” in claim 1 line 5, wherein the disclosure provides the following corresponding structure: hydraulic circuit 17 in Figure 1 to Figure 3 and “Furthermore, the compartment 13 houses both a hydraulic circuit 17, comprising, for example, a tank 17a, a flow meter 17b, a pump 17c, pipes 17d and a boiler 17e, to feed water to the brewing unit 15” on pg. 9
- “identification means” in claim 1 line 6-7, wherein the disclosure provides the following corresponding structure: “the identification means comprise at least one image acquisition device configured to acquire at least one image of the coffee beans contained in the hopper” and “the identification means comprise at least one image acquisition device configured to acquire at least one image of the coffee beans contained in the hopper” on pg. 4-5.
- “analysis means” in claim 5 line 3, wherein the disclosure provides the following corresponding structure: “The analysis 42, comparison 43, assigning 44 and processing 46 means can be defined by respective electrical/electronic components of a CPU or of a neural
network” on pg. 16.
- “comparison means” in claim 6 line 3, wherein the disclosure provides the following corresponding structure: “The analysis 42, comparison 43, assigning 44 and processing 46 means can be defined by respective electrical/electronic components of a CPU or of a neural
network” on pg. 16.
- “assigning means” in claim 7 line 3, wherein the disclosure provides the following corresponding structure: “The analysis 42, comparison 43, assigning 44 and processing 46 means can be defined by respective electrical/electronic components of a CPU or of a neural
network” on pg. 16.
“processing means” in claim 7 line 4, wherein the disclosure provides the following corresponding structure: “The analysis 42, comparison 43, assigning 44 and processing 46 means can be defined by respective electrical/electronic components of a CPU or of a neural
network” on pg. 16.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Objections
Claims 12-15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claims 12-15, Examiner respectfully suggests amending “A method” to “The method” to clarify that the method of claims 12-15 depend on the method recited in claim 11.
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 9 and 10 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 9 recites the limitation "the different varieties of said beans, the presence percentage of each of said varieties, the roasting level of said beans and the surface oiliness of said beans” in line 4-6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
For the purpose of examination, Examiner will interpret the limitation to be “a different varieties of said beans, a presence percentage of each of said varieties, a roasting level of said beans and a surface oiliness of said beans” to provide proper antecedent basis for the claim. However, clarification and correction is required.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the temperature of the brewing water, the brewing time, the flow rate of the brewing water, the quantity of brewing water, the brewing pressure, the quantity of coffee-based beverage to be prepared, the pre-brewing parameters comprising the temperature, the quantity of the pre-brewing water, the pre-brewing time, the beverage delivery time, the speed and flow rate of the brewing water, the granulometry and the grinding level of said coffee powder and the quantity of the latter to be subjected to brewing" in line 4-9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
For the purpose of examination, Examiner will interpret the limitation to be "a temperature of the brewing water, a brewing time, a flow rate of the brewing water, a quantity of brewing water, a brewing pressure, a quantity of coffee-based beverage to be prepared, a pre-brewing parameter comprising a temperature, a quantity of a pre-brewing water, a pre-brewing time, a beverage delivery time, a speed and flow rate of the brewing water, a granulometry and a grinding level of said coffee powder and a quantity of the latter to be subjected to brewing" to provide proper antecedent basis for the claim. However, clarification and correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 5, 9-12, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alshammary (US20180008088), and further in view of Boggavarapu (US10213047) and Voges et al. (US20190373940).
Regarding claim 1, Alshammary teaches a machine (coffee maker 100; Figure 1) for preparing coffee-based beverages starting from coffee beans (Abstract: A coffee maker and a method of brewing coffee are disclosed…. a funnel detachably attached to the first roaster providing a passage for a first amount and a second amount of coffee beans) comprising:
a hopper (first roaster 101A and second roaster 101B; Figure 1) configured to contain said coffee beans,
a grinding member (grinder 121; Figure 1) associated with said hopper to grind said coffee beans and obtain a coffee powder ([0018] The first roaster 101A and the second roaster 101B are connected to the funnel 111, which directs the coffee beans from the first roaster 101A and the second roaster 101B to the grinder 121),
brewing means (brewing container 131; Figure 1) configured to subject said coffee powder to brewing ([0018] The brewing container 131 brews the ground coffee from the grinder 121),
hydraulic means (water tank 151; Figure 1) configured to supply water to said brewing means ([0039]), and
further including identification means (temperature sensors 110A, 110B in Figure 1) configured to automatically identify one or more actual characteristics of said coffee beans ([0019] a temperature sensor (e.g., 110A and 110B) can be installed on the bottom part of the roaster 101 to detect the roasting temperature) and to automatically associate with said one or more actual characteristics ([0019] The temperature sensor can transmit the temperature information to the coffee-color controller 40) one or more functioning parameters for at least said grinding member ([0022], [0029], [0030]).
However, Alshammary fails to teach said identification means comprise at least one lighting device which is configured to illuminate the inside of said hopper, and an image acquisition device configured to acquire at least two images of said beans illuminated on each occasion by one of said at least two lighting elements.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to a machine for preparing coffee-based beverages, Boggavarapu teaches an identification means configured to automatically identify one or more actual characteristics of coffee beans inside a coffee bean roaster, wherein the identification means comprises at least one laser, lamp, or lighting emitting diode (col 8 line 56-59) which is configured to illuminate the inside of a coffee bean roaster (col 10 line 20-30), and an image acquisition device configured to acquire at least images of said beans illuminated on each occasion by lighting elements (col 7 line 11-16 and col 10 line 31-36). At least one lighting device can provide individual bean roasting to optimize taste, and imaging the beans uses feedback to control the light sources to optimize the roasting (col 10 line 13-16 and 31-34).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the identification means of Alshammary to comprise at least one lighting device which is configured to illuminate the inside of said hopper, and an image acquisition device configured to acquire at least two images of said beans illuminated on the at least two lighting elements, as taught by Boggavarapu, for the benefit of optimizing the taste on an individual bean level, and for using feedback to control the light sources that optimize the roasting.
However, Alshammary modified with Boggavarapu fails to teach the at least one light emitting diode has at least two lighting elements which are configured to emit respective light beams that have a different wavelength with respect to each other.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to roasting coffee beans, Voges teaches a bean color detector includes a white light LED ([0145] In some embodiments, the color detector includes a white light LED). White light is produced by combining multiple wavelengths such that a white light LED would emit respective light beams that have a different wavelength with respect to each other.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the light emitting diodes of Alshammary modified with Boggavarapu be white light emitting diodes, as taught by Voges, such that light beams having a different wavelengths with respect to each other are emitted, since choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success is obvious. It has been shown that a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options in their art. If this leads to an anticipated success, it is likely that it was not due to innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense (KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1397 (2007)). In the instant case, Boggavarapu teaches the lighting elements are LEDS, and there are a finite number of LED colors with particular wavelengths that can be chosen from and combined to obtain a white LED that yields the predictable result of illumination.
Regarding claim 2, Alshammary modified with Boggavarapu and Voges teaches the machine for preparing coffee-based beverages as in claim 1.
Further, Alshammary teaches the identification means is disposed, during use, inside said hopper (see temperature sensors 110A, 110B in roaster 101A and roaster 101B in Figure 1). Placing the identification means inside the hopper allows for direct monitoring and optimization of the beans as they are being roasted.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the said image acquisition device and said lighting device of Alshammary modified with Boggavarapu and Voges be disposed, during use, inside said hopper, as suggested by Alshammary, for the benefit of allowing direct monitoring and optimization of the beans as they are being roasted.
Regarding claim 5, Alshammary modified with Boggavarapu and Voges teaches the machine for preparing coffee-based beverages as in claim 1.
Further, said identification means also comprise a processing unit comprising analysis means configured to analyze the color of the coffee beans represented in said image and consequently assign said one or more actual characteristics thereto (col 9 line 44-53 and col 10 line 31-40).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the identification means of Alshammary modified with Boggavarapu and Voges comprise a processing unit comprising analysis means configured to analyze the color of the coffee beans represented in said image and consequently assign said one or more actual characteristics thereto, as taught by Boggavarapu, for the benefit of optimizing the taste on an individual bean level, and for using feedback to control the light sources that optimize the roasting.
Regarding claim 9, Alshammary modified with Boggavarapu and Voges teaches the machine for preparing coffee-based beverages as in claim 1.
Further, Boggavarapu teaches wherein said one or more actual characteristics is the roasting level of said beans (col 10 line 31-44).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the one or more actual characteristics of Alshammary modified with Boggavarapu and Voges be the roasting level of said beans, as taught by Boggavarapu, for the benefit of optimizing the taste on an individual bean level, and for using feedback to control the light sources that optimize the roasting.
Regarding claim 10, Alshammary modified with Boggavarapu and Voges teaches the machine for preparing coffee-based beverages as in claim 1.
Further, Alshammary teaches wherein said one or more functioning parameters comprise the parameters of a quantity of coffee-based beverage to be prepared and a quantity coffee powder to be subjected to brewing ([0006] the method includes passing a first amount of coffee beans from the first roaster and a second amount of coffee beans from the second roaster by controlling a first discharge door and a second discharge door, using the processing circuitry, starting, using the processing circuitry, a blade of the grinder to grind the coffee beans. Further, the method includes measuring, using a measuring device, an amount of ground coffee based on a number of coffee requested, and starting, using the processing circuitry, brewing of ground coffee received from the grinder, [0025], [0029] The desired color is then received by the coffee-color controller 40 that controls the roasting, grinding and brewing to output a coffee of desired color).
Regarding claim 11, Alshammary teaches a method for preparing coffee-based beverages starting from coffee beans by means of a machine (Abstract: A coffee maker and a method of brewing coffee are disclosed…. a funnel detachably attached to the first roaster providing a passage for a first amount and a second amount of coffee beans) having a hopper configured to contain said coffee beans (first roaster 101A and second roaster 101B; Figure 1), a grinding member (grinder 121; Figure 1) associated with said hopper to grind said coffee beans and obtain a coffee powder ([0018] The first roaster 101A and the second roaster 101B are connected to the funnel 111, which directs the coffee beans from the first roaster 101A and the second roaster 101B to the grinder 121), brewing means (brewing container 131; Figure 1) configured to subject said coffee powder to brewing ([0018] The brewing container 131 brews the ground coffee from the grinder 121), and hydraulic means (water tank 151; Figure 1) configured to supply water to said brewing means ([0039]),
wherein said method comprises an identification step in which one or more actual characteristics of said coffee beans are automatically identified ([0019] a temperature sensor (e.g., 110A and 110B) can be installed on the bottom part of the roaster 101 to detect the roasting temperature) by means of identification means (temperature sensors 110A, 110B in Figure 1), and
one or more functioning parameters for said grinding member ([0019] The temperature sensor can transmit the temperature information to the coffee-color controller 40, [0029] The desired color is then received by the coffee-color controller 40 that controls the roasting, grinding and brewing to output a coffee of desired color) are automatically associated with said one or more actual characteristics ([0022], [0029], [0030]).,
However, Alshammary fails to teach said identification means comprise at least one lighting device which is configured to illuminate the inside of said hopper, and an image acquisition device configured to acquire at least two images of said beans illuminated on each occasion by one of said at least two lighting elements.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to a machine for preparing coffee-based beverages, Boggavarapu teaches an identification means configured to automatically identify one or more actual characteristics of coffee beans inside a coffee bean roaster, wherein the identification means comprises at least one laser, lamp, or lighting emitting diode (col 8 line 56-59) which is configured to illuminate the inside of a coffee bean roaster (col 10 line 20-30), and an image acquisition device configured to acquire at least images of said beans illuminated on each occasion by lighting elements (col 7 line 11-16 and col 10 line 31-36). At least one lighting device can provide individual bean roasting to optimize taste, and imaging the beans uses feedback to control the light sources to optimize the roasting (col 10 line 13-16 and 31-34).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the identification means of Alshammary to comprise at least one lighting device which is configured to illuminate the inside of said hopper, and an image acquisition device configured to acquire at least two images of said beans illuminated on the at least two lighting elements, as taught by Boggavarapu, for the benefit of optimizing the taste on an individual bean level, and for using feedback to control the light sources that optimize the roasting.
However, Alshammary modified with Boggavarapu fails to teach the at least one light emitting diode has at least two lighting elements which are configured to emit respective light beams that have a different wavelength with respect to each other.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to roasting coffee beans, Voges teaches a bean color detector includes a white light LED ([0145] In some embodiments, the color detector includes a white light LED). White light is produced by combining multiple wavelengths such that a white light LED would emit respective light beams that have a different wavelength with respect to each other.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the light emitting diodes of Alshammary modified with Boggavarapu be white light emitting diodes, as taught by Voges, such that light beams having a different wavelengths with respect to each other are emitted, since choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success is obvious. It has been shown that a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options in their art. If this leads to an anticipated success, it is likely that it was not due to innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense (KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1397 (2007)). In the instant case, Boggavarapu teaches the lighting elements are LEDS, and there are a finite number of LED colors with particular wavelengths that can be chosen from and combined to obtain a white LED that yields the predictable result of illumination.
Regarding claim 12, Alshammary modified with Boggavarapu and Voges teaches the method for preparing coffee-based beverages as in claim 11.
Further, Boggavarapu teaches analyzing the color of said beans in an image to assign to the beans one or more actual characteristics, where the one or more actual characteristics is the roasting level of said beans (col 10 line 31-44).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the identification step of Alshammary modified with Boggavarapu and Voges analyze the color of said beans represented in said at least two images in order to assign to said beans said one or more actual characteristics comprising the roasting level of said beans, as suggested by Boggavarapu, for the benefit of optimizing the taste on an individual bean level, and for using feedback to control the light sources that optimize the roasting.
Regarding claim 15, Alshammary modified with Boggavarapu and Voges teaches the method for preparing coffee-based beverages as in claim 11.
Further, Boggavarapu teaches the method further comprising an adjustment step in which the functioning parameters of said machine are adjusted on the basis of said one or more functioning parameters (col 10 line 31-40).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the method of Alshammary modified with Boggavarapu and Voges further comprise an adjustment step in which the functioning parameters of said machine are adjusted on the basis of said one or more functioning parameters, as taught by Boggavarapu, for the benefit of optimizing the taste on an individual bean level, and for using feedback to control the light sources that optimize the roasting.
Claim(s) 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alshammary (US20180008088), Boggavarapu (US10213047), and Voges et al. (US20190373940), and further in view of Rose et al. (US20180055288).
Regarding claim 3, Alshammary modified with Boggavarapu and Voges teaches the machine for preparing coffee-based beverages as in claim 1.
However, Alshammary fails to teach in which said hopper comprises a removable lid, wherein at least one of either said image acquisition device or said lighting device is installed on said lid and is powered by means of battery power supply means which are also disposed on said lid.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to machines for preparing coffee-based beverages, Rose teaches a hopper comprising a removable lid (foodstuff analyzer 701 in Figure 10; [0156] The analyzer 701 can be in the form of a sensing lid that can be placed above any container of beans, such as the existing hopper of a commercial coffee grinder),
wherein said image acquisition device ([0156] gas sensor 703, a temperature and humidity sensor 709, and other environmental sensors) or said lighting device (distance sensor 702; Figure 11) is installed on said lid and is powered by means of battery power supply means (power supply 707; Figure 11) which are also disposed on said lid (see power supply 707 disposed on analyzer 701 in Figure 11). Placing the image acquisition device or lighting device in the lid allows for measurements to be performed very near the beans themselves as opposed to sensing at a distance through a headspace connection tube ([0158] In an alternate embodiment, the gas sensors, temperature sensor, and other electronic components are located in the removable lids of the grinder. This provides the advantage of placing the sensor very near the beans themselves, as opposed to sensing at a distance through the headspace connection tube).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the image acquisition device or lighting device of Alshammary modified with Boggavarapu and Voges be installed on a lid and powered by means of battery power supply means which are also disposed on said lid, as taught by Rose, for the benefit of performing measurements very near the beans themselves as opposed to sensing at a distance through a headspace connection tube.
Regarding claim 4, Alshammary modified with Boggavarapu and Voges teaches the machine for preparing coffee-based beverages as in claim 1.
However, Alshammary fails to teach wherein said image acquisition device and said lighting device are both integrated in a closing lid of said hopper.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to machines for preparing coffee-based beverages, Rose teaches the image acquisition device and the lighting device are both integrated in a closing lid of said hopper (see gas sensor 703, a temperature and humidity sensor 709, and other environmental sensors, distance sensor 702 disposed on analyzer 701 on in Figure 11).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the image acquisition device and lighting device of Alshammary modified with Boggavarapu and Voges be installed on a closing lid of the hopper, as taught by Rose, for the benefit of performing measurements very near the beans themselves as opposed to sensing at a distance through a headspace connection tube.
Claim(s) 6-8, 13, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alshammary (US20180008088), Boggavarapu (US10213047), and Voges et al. (US20190373940), and further in view of List (DE102019200788- Machine translation provided herein).
Regarding claim 6, Alshammary modified with Boggavarapu and Voges teaches the machine for preparing coffee-based beverages as in claim 5. While Boggavarapu teaches image processing algorithms interpreted as the processing unit that uses feedback to optimize the roasting (col 10 line 31-36), Alshammary modified with Boggavarapu and Voges fails to explicitly teach wherein said processing unit also comprises comparison means configured to compare said one or more actual characteristics with one or more combinations of predetermined characteristics stored in a memory of said processing unit, each of which is associated with a corresponding combination of predetermined functioning parameters stored in said memory of said processing unit, and then to associate with said one or more actual characteristics a determinate combination of predetermined functioning parameters corresponding to the combination of predetermined characteristics most similar to said one or more actual characteristics.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to machines for preparing coffee-based beverages, List teaches a roasting color detected by a camera is compared with a map in which each color is assigned an individual degree of roasting, and then optimizing the brewing parameters by making the appropriate settings via the respective degree of roasting ([0006] the color of the coffee beans used can be detected via the camera and the degree of roasting can in turn be determined via the color. For this purpose, the color recorded by the recording device or the camera can be compared with a characteristic map in which each color is assigned an individual degree of roasting. The setting device can in turn make appropriate settings via the respective degree of roasting. This also allows the brewing parameters to be optimized and the coffee drink drawn from the fully automatic coffee machine to be optimally adapted to the coffee bean used or its degree of roasting).
Further, List teaches one or more combinations of predetermined characteristics stored in a memory are associated with a corresponding combination of predetermined functioning parameters stored in the memory ([0008] the sensor device has a reading device for reading a barcode or a dot matrix code. Such a bar code or such a dot matrix code can be arranged on a package of coffee beans, for example, which is read in via the reading device of the sensor device, together with the information stored in the code. In particular, the manufacturer of the coffee beans used, a coffee bean type, a degree of roasting, etc. can be stored. The brewing parameters can then be set either on the basis of defined characteristic maps, i.e. in this case the fully automatic coffee machine has stored a fixed list of coffee beans and associated brewing parameters from which the settings can be read, or by the fully automatic coffee machine acquiring the necessary brewing parameters, for example via a existing network connection, either directly or indirectly via a Smart Connect connection to other devices, such as smartphones, downloads from the Internet). List teaches a fully automated coffee machine that can significantly increase customer convenience ([0014] the fully automated adaptation of the brewing parameters to the recorded coffee bean parameters represents a significant increase in convenience for the consumer) while providing an optimally adapted coffee drink in terms of intensity, taste, crema, and degree of roasting ([0006] This also allows the brewing parameters to be optimized and the coffee drink drawn from the fully automatic coffee machine to be optimally adapted to the coffee bean used or its degree of roasting, for example in terms of intensity, taste and crema).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the processing unit of Alshammary modified with Boggavarapu and Voges also comprise a comparison means configured to compare said one or more actual characteristics with one or more combinations of predetermined characteristics stored in a memory of said processing unit, each of which is associated with a corresponding combination of predetermined functioning parameters stored in said memory of said processing unit, and then to associate with said one or more actual characteristics a determinate combination of predetermined functioning parameters corresponding to the combination of predetermined characteristics most similar to said one or more actual characteristics, as suggested by List, for the benefit of significantly increasing customer convenience while providing an optimally adapted coffee drink in terms of intensity, taste, crema, and degree of roasting.
Regarding claim 7, Alshammary modified with Boggavarapu and Voges teaches the machine for preparing coffee-based beverages as in claim 5.
However, Alshammary fails to teach wherein said processing unit also comprises assigning means for assigning determinate numerical values to said one or more actual characteristics, and processing means that process said numerical values to obtain said one or more functioning parameters.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to machines for preparing coffee-based beverages, List teaches a processing unit also comprises assigning means for assigning determinate numerical values to said one or more actual characteristics, and processing means that process said numerical values to obtain said one or more functioning parameters ([0006] the color recorded by the recording device or the camera can be compared with a characteristic map in which each color is assigned an individual degree of roasting. The setting device can in turn make appropriate settings via the respective degree of roasting. This also allows the brewing parameters to be optimized and the coffee drink drawn from the fully automatic coffee machine to be optimally adapted to the coffee bean used or its degree of roasting, for example in terms of intensity, taste and crema).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the processing unit of Alshammary modified with Boggavarapu and Voges to comprise assigning means for assigning determinate numerical values to said one or more actual characteristics, and processing means that process said numerical values to obtain said one or more functioning parameters, as suggested by List, for the benefit of significantly increasing customer convenience while providing an optimally adapted coffee drink in terms of intensity, taste, crema, and degree of roasting.
Regarding claim 8, Alshammary modified with Boggavarapu and Voges teaches the machine for preparing coffee-based beverages as in claim 5.
However, Alshammary fails to teach the machine also comprising a command unit configured to command and adjust the functioning of at least one of either said hopper, said grinding member, said hydraulic means or said brewing means, wherein said processing unit is configured to transmit said one or more functioning parameters to said command unit in order to control and adjust the functioning of at least one of either said hopper, said grinding member, said hydraulic means or said brewing means.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to machines for preparing coffee-based beverages, List teaches a command unit (“setting device” of List) configured to command and adjust the functioning of at least one of either said hopper, said grinding member, said hydraulic means or said brewing means, wherein said processing unit is configured to transmit said one or more functioning parameters to said command unit in order to control and adjust the functioning of at least one of either said hopper, said grinding member, said hydraulic means or said brewing means ([0006] For example, the color of the coffee beans used can be detected via the camera and the degree of roasting can in turn be determined via the color. For this purpose, the color recorded by the recording device or the camera can be compared with a characteristic map in which each color is assigned an individual degree of roasting. The setting device can in turn make appropriate settings via the respective degree of roasting. This also allows the brewing parameters to be optimized and the coffee drink drawn from the fully automatic coffee machine to be optimally adapted to the coffee bean used or its degree of roasting, for example in terms of intensity, taste and crema, [0010] a method for operating a
fully automatic coffee machine with a setting device for setting at least one brewing parameter,
the setting device having at least one sensor device which recognizes or records at least one
coffee bean parameter from coffee beans used and which with is connected to the setting
device and wherein the setting device automatically sets the at least one brewing parameter
as a function of the at least one coffee bean parameter detected by the sensor device, and [0007] The sensor device is expediently set to detect an oil content and/or a water content of the coffee beans. Just like the camera, other sensors can also be part of the sensor device, such as a moisture sensor, which in particular detects the water content of the coffee beans used. The degree of grinding or the amount of water, for example, can be influenced by the respective detected oil content and water content, with the setting device being designed in such a way that it sets at least one brewing parameter depending on the oil content and/or water content detected by the sensor device).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the machine of Alshammary modified with Boggavarapu and Voges comprise a command unit configured to command and adjust the functioning of at least one of either said hopper, said grinding member, said hydraulic means or said brewing means, wherein said processing unit is configured to transmit said one or more functioning parameters to said command unit in order to control and adjust the functioning of at least one of either said hopper, said grinding member, said hydraulic means or said brewing means, as suggested by List, for the benefit of significantly increasing customer convenience while providing an optimally adapted coffee drink in terms of intensity, taste, crema, and degree of roasting.
Regarding claim 13, Alshammary modified with Boggavarapu and Voges teaches the method for preparing coffee-based beverages as in claim 11.
While Boggavarapu teaches image processing algorithms interpreted as the processing unit that uses feedback to optimize the roasting (col 10 line 31-36), Alshammary modified with Boggavarapu and Voges fails to explicitly teach wherein said identification step compares said one or more actual characteristics with one or more combinations of predetermined characteristics, stored in a memory of a processing unit, each of which is associated with a corresponding combination of predetermined functioning stored in said memory of said processing unit, and then associates with said one or more actual characteristics a determinate combination of predetermined functioning parameters corresponding to the combination of predetermined characteristics most similar to said one or more actual characteristics.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to machines for preparing coffee-based beverages, List teaches a roasting color detected by a camera is compared with a map in which each color is assigned an individual degree of roasting, and then optimizing the brewing parameters by making the appropriate settings via the respective degree of roasting (([0006] the color of the coffee beans used can be detected via the camera and the degree of roasting can in turn be determined via the color. For this purpose, the color recorded by the recording device or the camera can be compared with a characteristic map in which each color is assigned an individual degree of roasting. The setting device can in turn make appropriate settings via the respective degree of roasting. This also allows the brewing parameters to be optimized and the coffee drink drawn from the fully automatic coffee machine to be optimally adapted to the coffee bean used or its degree of roasting).
Further, List teaches one or more combinations of predetermined characteristics stored in a memory are associated with a corresponding combination of predetermined functioning parameters stored in the memory ([0008] the sensor device has a reading device for reading a barcode or a dot matrix code. Such a bar code or such a dot matrix code can be arranged on a package of coffee beans, for example, which is read in via the reading device of the sensor device, together with the information stored in the code. In particular, the manufacturer of the coffee beans used, a coffee bean type, a degree of roasting, etc. can be stored. The brewing parameters can then be set either on the basis of defined characteristic maps, i.e. in this case the fully automatic coffee machine has stored a fixed list of coffee beans and associated brewing parameters from which the settings can be read, or by the fully automatic coffee machine acquiring the necessary brewing parameters, for example via a existing network connection, either directly or indirectly via a Smart Connect connection to other devices, such as smartphones, downloads from the Internet). List teaches a fully automated coffee machine that can significantly increase customer convenience ([0014] the fully automated adaptation of the brewing parameters to the recorded coffee bean parameters represents a significant increase in convenience for the consumer) while providing an optimally adapted coffee drink in terms of intensity, taste, crema, and degree of roasting ([0006] This also allows the brewing parameters to be optimized and the coffee drink drawn from the fully automatic coffee machine to be optimally adapted to the coffee bean used or its degree of roasting, for example in terms of intensity, taste and crema).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the identification step of Alshammary modified with Boggavarapu and Voges compare said one or more actual characteristics with one or more combinations of predetermined characteristics, stored in a memory of a processing unit, each of which is associated with a corresponding combination of predetermined functioning stored in said memory of said processing unit, and then associates with said one or more actual characteristics a determinate combination of predetermined functioning parameters corresponding to the combination of predetermined characteristics most similar to said one or more actual characteristics, as suggested by List, for the benefit of significantly increasing customer convenience while providing an optimally adapted coffee drink in terms of intensity, taste, crema, and degree of roasting.
Regarding claim 14, Alshammary modified with Boggavarapu and Voges teaches the method for preparing coffee-based beverages as in claim 11. However, Alshammary fails to teach said identification step assigns determinate numerical values to said one or more actual characteristics processes said numerical values according to predetermined correlation equations, in order to obtain said one or more functioning parameters.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to machines for preparing coffee-based beverages, List teaches a processing unit also comprises assigning means for assigning determinate numerical values to said one or more actual characteristics, and processing means that process said numerical values to obtain said one or more functioning parameters ([0006] the color recorded by the recording device or the camera can be compared with a characteristic map in which each color is assigned an individual degree of roasting. The setting device can in turn make appropriate settings via the respective degree of roasting. This also allows the brewing parameters to be optimized and the coffee drink drawn from the fully automatic coffee machine to be optimally adapted to the coffee bean used or its degree of roasting, for example in terms of intensity, taste and crema).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the identification step of Alshammary modified with Boggavarapu and Voges assign determinate numerical values to said one or more actual characteristics processes said numerical values according to predetermined correlation equations, in order to obtain said one or more functioning parameters, as suggested by List, for the benefit of significantly increasing customer convenience while providing an optimally adapted coffee drink in terms of intensity, taste, crema, and degree of roasting.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARIELLA MACHNESS whose telephone number is (408)918-7587. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 6:30-2:30 PT.
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, Galen Hauth can be reached at 571-270-5516. 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.
/ARIELLA MACHNESS/Examiner, Art Unit 1743
Prosecution Insights