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 Objections
Claims 1 and 4-5 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1 line 17, “…receive the output thereof…” should read “…receive an output thereof…” so that there is a sufficient antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim.
In claim 1 line 19, “…to control operation…” should read “…to control the operation…” as positively recited in line 18.
In claim 4 line 2, “…the stored targe pressure profile…” should read “…the at least one target pressure profile…” for the purpose of consistency in the use of term in the claim.
In claim 5 lines 1-2, “…the stored targe pressure profile…” should read “…the at least one target pressure profile…” for the purpose of consistency in the use of term in the claim.
Appropriate 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.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 4-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Merati et al. (US 2020/0270114) in view of Dees (US 2019/0059638) and White et al. (US 2018/0084940).
Regarding claim 1, Merati et al. ‘114 teaches (figures 1-4) a milk module/milk supply circuit (1) for preparing hot or cold, frothed or non-frothed milk-based beverages from liquid milk, the milk module comprising:
a milk line/milk suction duct (5) and milk supply duct (10) extending from a milk container/tank (3) to a milk dispensing nozzle/duct (13) (Para 0020-0021);
an air line/air supply duct (6) extending from an air source and communicating with the milk line/milk suction duct (5) and milk supply duct (10) (Para 0020);
a milk pump (4) to draw the liquid milk from the milk container/tank (3) (Para 0020);
a milk heater (9) (Para 0021);
a proportional air solenoid valve (7) arranged along the air line/air supply duct (6) (Para 0020, 0025-0030);
an electronic control unit/electronic milk control unit (15) in communication with the milk pump (4) and the proportional air solenoid valve (7) (Para 0023)
but it is silent about the milk module comprising:
a flow restriction arranged on a delivery side of the milk pump.
Dees ‘638 teaches (figure 1) a frothing unit comprising a fluid restriction (44) positioned downstream of the pump (30) (Para 0044).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Merati et al. ‘114 to incorporate the teachings of Dees ‘638 to configure the milk module comprising:
a flow restriction arranged on a delivery side of the milk pump.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would enable to produce high quality frothed milk (Para 0045).
Merati et al. ‘114 further teaches the electronic milk control unit (15) programmed to determine and control the operation of the milk pump (4) and of the air solenoid valve (7) based on milk related quantities (Para 0056-0061).
but it is silent about the milk module comprising:
a pressure sensor to measure and output an output indicative of a pressure of a milk-air mixture in the milk line downstream of the milk pump; and
an electronic control unit in communication with the pressure sensor to receive an output thereof and the proportional air solenoid valve to control operation thereof;
wherein, in order to control the operation of the proportional air solenoid valve, the electronic control unit is configured to:
store data representative of at least one target pressure profile indicative of a time development of a target pressure of the milk-air mixture that is desired to be obtained in the milk line, downstream of the milk pump; and
control by closed-loop the proportional air solenoid valve based on the pressure of the milk-air mixture measured by the pressure sensor and the target pressure profile.
White et al. 940 teaches (figures 1-6B) an espresso making machine (100) comprising an air injector module (144) injecting steam to a steam wand (142) wherein the air injector module (144) comprises a primary steam flow path (145), an air injection path (146) and an outflow (147) wherein the air injection flow path (146) receives pressured air delivered by an air pump (150), wherein a pressure sensor (154) coupled to the air flow path (146) provides pressure measurements to the processor module/electronic control unit (130) based on which the air pump (150) is controlled (Para 0110-0112)
wherein, in order to control the air pump (150), the processor module/electronic control unit (130) is configured to:
store data representative of at least one target pressure profile indicative of a time development of a target pressure/sampled air pressure of the air that is desired to be obtained in the air flow path (146), downstream of the air pump (150) (Para 0176); and
control by closed-loop the air pump (50) based on the pressure of the air measured by the pressure sensor and the target pressure profile (Para 0165).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Merati et al. ‘114 to incorporate the teachings of White et al. ‘940 to configure the milk module comprising:
a pressure sensor to measure and output an output indicative of a pressure of a milk-air mixture in the milk line downstream of the milk pump; and
an electronic control unit in communication with the pressure sensor to receive an output thereof and the proportional air solenoid valve to control operation thereof (controlling proportional air solenoid valve controls the pressure of milk-air mixture through the pump);
wherein, in order to control the operation of the proportional air solenoid valve, the electronic control unit is configured to:
store data representative of at least one target pressure profile indicative of a time development of a target pressure of the milk-air mixture that is desired to be obtained in the mil line, downstream of the milk pump; and
control by closed-loop the proportional air solenoid valve based on the pressure of the milk-air mixture measured by the pressure sensor and the target pressure profile.
(milk-air mixture of Merati et al. ‘114 is analogous to air in the air flow path (146) of White et al. ‘940, as pressures applied to milk-air mixture and air in the air flow path determines the quality of frothing).
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would enhance quality of the frothing.
Regarding claim 2, modified Merati et al. ‘114 teaches (figures 1-4) the milk module wherein the pressure sensor is a physical sensor arranged along the milk line on the delivery side of the milk pump (as modified by White et al. ‘940).
Regarding claim 4, modified Merati et al. ‘114 teaches (figures 1-4) the milk module wherein the at least one target pressure profile causes the proportional air solenoid valve to be controlled to cause the pressure of the milk-air mixture in the milk line, downstream of the milk pump, to have a variable development over time (as modified by White et al. ‘940; clearly seen in figure 4)
but it is silent about the milk module wherein the at least one target pressure profile to have a substantially constant development over time.
However, the Examiner takes Official Notice that it is well known in the art to design a target pressure profile, as needed, to achieve desired pressure development over time. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Merati et al. ‘114 to configure the milk module wherein the at least one target pressure profile to have a substantially constant development over time.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would ensure milk-air mixture has constant output pressure.
Regarding claim 5, modified Merati et al. ‘114 teaches (figures 1-4) the milk module wherein the at least one target pressure profile causes the proportional air solenoid valve to be controlled to cause the pressure of the milk-air mixture in the milk line, downstream of the milk pump, to have a variable development over time (as modified by White et al. ‘940; clearly seen in figure 4).
Regarding claim 6, modified Merati et al. ‘114 teaches (figures 1-4) the milk module wherein the electronic control unit/electronic milk control unit (15) is further configured to store different pressure profiles, each of which is associated with a respective milk-based beverage that can be produced by the milk module (Para 0056-0061; electronic control unit/electronic milk control unit (15) processes various milk-related quantities e.g., whole milk, semi-skimmed milk etc. and each have different pressure profiles).
Regarding claim 7, modified Merati et al. ‘114 teaches (figures 1-4) the milk module wherein the electronic control unit/electronic milk control unit (15) is further configured to control proportional air solenoid valve by implementing a Proportional-Derivative (PD) controller (as modified by White et al. ‘940; Para 0155).
Regarding claim 8, modified Merati et al. ‘114 teaches (figures 1-4) an automatic beverage preparation machine/automatic beverage vending machine comprising the milk module of claim 1 (Para 0010).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Merati et al. (US 2020/0270114), Dees (US 2019/0059638) and White et al. (US 2018/0084940) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Crozier et al. (US 2021/0127892).
Regarding claim 3, modified Merati et al. ‘114 teaches (figures 1-4) the milk module of claim 1 but it is silent about the milk module wherein the pressure sensor is a virtual sensor designed to measure and output an output indicative of the pressure of the milk-air mixture in the milk line downstream of the milk pump based on an electric current absorbed by the milk pump.
Crozier et al. ‘892 teaches (figures 1-2) a pressure of liquid in the fluid circuit in beverage preparation apparatus is determined by the absorbed electrical current measured at the pump (Para 0046).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Merati et al. ‘114 to incorporate the teachings of Crozier et al. ‘892 to configure the milk module wherein the pressure sensor is a virtual sensor designed to measure and output an output indicative of the pressure of the milk-air mixture in the milk line downstream of the milk pump based on an electric current absorbed by the milk pump.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would enable to measure two variables i.e., absorbed current and pressure using a single sensor.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ASHESH DANGOL whose telephone number is (303)297-4455. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 0730-0530 MT.
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, Joshua J Michener can be reached at (571) 272-1467. 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.
/ASHESH DANGOL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Prosecution Insights