Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 04, 2026
Application No. 18/703,187

MACHINE AND METHOD FOR PREPARING BEVERAGES

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Apr 19, 2024
Priority
Oct 19, 2021 — IT 102021000026807 +1 more
Examiner
ROSARIO-APONTE, ALBA T
Art Unit
1792
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
De' Longhi Appliances S R L Con Unico Socio
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
55%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 4m
Est. Remaining
81%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 55% of resolved cases
55%
Career Allowance Rate
273 granted / 493 resolved
-9.6% vs TC avg
Strong +25% interview lift
Without
With
+25.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 10m
Avg Prosecution
36 currently pending
Career history
530
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
47.5%
+7.5% vs TC avg
§102
16.2%
-23.8% vs TC avg
§112
29.8%
-10.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 493 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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 1-11 in the reply filed on 05/22/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 12-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. 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. Such claim limitation (s) is/are: “recognition means” and “activation means” in claim 1, and “updating means” in claim 3. 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: “accessory members” and “detection members” in claim 2. 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. As noticed in page 4, lines 22-25, and page 5, lines 2-6, the activation means can comprise one or more accessory members physically connectable to the machine, and the recognition means can comprise detection members and/or sensors suitable to detect the presence of a respective accessory member…the activation means can comprise one or more computer codes, each of which identifies one or more of the additional operating functions. In this case, the recognition means can comprise or consist of a user interface by means of which the computer code can be received, for example by means of a code reader, an alphanumeric keyboard, or a wireless transmission. As noticed in page 10, lines 29-33 and page 11, lines 1-5, the updating means 38 can be integrated in the detection members 41, 42 or even be elements separate from them, but suitable to supply to the processor 33 information regarding the fact that one of the accessory members 43, 44 has been connected to machine 10 for the first time, so as to determine the activation or the availability of the respective packet of data or programs. The updating means 38 can also be integrated in the processor 33 itself, and be configured to identify when an activation mean 40 is connected to or associated with the machine 10 for the first time, or possibly even after a certain time interval, so as to determine the activation or updating, respectively, of the specific packet of data or programs. As noticed in page 11, lines 6-10, the detection members 41 and 42 are substantially of a known type, such as sensors or micro-switches for example, and each one is configured to detect, or recognize, a specific accessory member, which can be, by way of example, a specific jug 43, suitable to contain milk and having a certain shape and size, or a steam delivery lance 44. 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. This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “electronic memory means” in claim 1. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant intends 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 remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function. Claim Objections Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 9, the limitation “said machine (10), said machine” should read “said machine”. Appropriate correction is required. 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. Claim 7 is 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 7 recites the limitation "the normal operation" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Barnett (US 2016/0287004). Regarding claim 1, Barnett teaches a machine (100) for preparing beverages, the machine comprising: a brewing unit configured to prepare at least one certain beverage (para. 0025), a hydraulic circuit to feed water to said brewing unit (as shown in Fig. 2; para. 0032-0036), a delivery unit configured to deliver said certain beverage (para. 0026), a processor (190) operatively connected to said brewing unit, to said hydraulic circuit and to said delivery unit to control and command a drive of said brewing unit, said hydraulic circuit and said delivery unit (para. 0030-0031; 0051; 0114-0116; as shown in Fig. 5 and 13), electronic memory means (530) connected to said processor and configured to store packets of data and programs relating to operating functions associated with said beverages (para. 0051-0053; as shown in Fig. 5), and a user interface (520) communicating with said processor to select said certain beverage (para. 0050-0051; as shown in Fig. 5), said machine further comprising: recognition means operatively connected to said processor (para. 0040-0042; 0046-0047; proximity sensor 375, 376 senses proximity of magnet 342 and therefore the position of paddle 116) and configured to recognize a presence of at least one of one or several activation means (para. 0046-0047; the correct position of the paddle 116 is sensed and the controller begins a programmed sequence of outputs to dispense coffee) which are at least temporarily connected to or associated with said machine (para. 0046-0047; the paddle 116 is temporarily connected), wherein with each of said activation means there is associated additional packets of data and programs relating to additional operating functions associated with said activation means (para. 0046-0048) and wherein said recognition means are configured to send a signal to said processor at least following a first recognition of the presence of one of said activation means (para. 0046-0048), and said processor is configured to activate or make available in said electronic memory means an additional packet of data and programs relating to additional operating functions associated with said recognized activation means (para. 0046-0048). Regarding claim 2, Barnett teaches the machine as in claim 1, wherein said activation means comprise one or more accessory members, each suitable to perform its own operating functions (para. 0046-0048), and said recognition means comprise one or more detection members (375, 376), each configured to detect the presence of a specific accessory member (para. 0046-0048). Regarding claim 3, Barnett teaches the machine as in claim 2, wherein said recognition means comprise both said detection members suitable to recognize said specific accessory member each time it is connected to said machine (para. 0040-0042; 0046-0047; proximity sensor 375, 376 senses proximity of magnet 342 and therefore the position of paddle 116), and also updating means suitable to cooperate with said detection means and said processor at least when said accessory member is connected to said machine for a first time to determine the activation of a respective packet of data and programs and therefore the updating of said machine with the operating functions associated with said recognized accessory member (para. 0046-0048). Regarding claim 4, Barnett teaches the machine as in claim 1, wherein said activation means comprise one or more computer codes, identifying said additional operating functions (para. 0052-0056), and said recognition means comprise a user interface by means of which said computer code is received and transmitted to said processor (para. 0052-0056). Regarding claim 5, Barnett teaches the machine as in claim 1, wherein said electronic memory means are configured to store said additional packets of data and programs (para. 0051-0053). Regarding claim 6, Barnett teaches the machine as in claim 1, wherein said additional packets of data and programs are already pre-stored in said electronic memory means (para. 0051-0053). Regarding claim 7, Barnett teaches the machine as in claim 1, wherein in said electronic memory means there are stored both packets of data and programs configured to be executed during the normal operation of said machine in a basic configuration thereof, and also additional packets of data and programs which are in a dormant status and temporarily deactivated in said basic configuration and are configured to be made available by said processor at the first recognition of a specific activation mean in an updated configuration of said machine (as shown in Fig. 5; para. 0050-0056). Regarding claim 8, Barnett teaches the machine as in claim 1, in which said processor, during use, is connected to a communication network, wherein said processor is programmed to connect automatically, or selectively, to said communication network to download or update said additional packets of data and programs when said additional packets of data and programs are not already pre-stored in said electronic memory means, or are not updated (para. 0114-0116). Regarding claim 9, Barnett teaches the machine as in claim 1, wherein said processor is programmed, or programmable, to activate said additional operating functions and command the preparation and delivery of one or more additional beverages and/or other functions relating to said certain beverage, when said recognition means recognize, or detect the presence of, at least a specific one of said activation means, making a possibility of selecting said one or more additional beverages or said other functions associated with said certain beverage accessible to the user, by means of said user interface (para. 0092-0095). Regarding claim 10, Barnett teaches the machine as in claim 2, said machine further comprising one or more housing seatings configured to each house a specific one of said one or more accessory members and in correspondence with which there are disposed respective detection members (para. 0040-0042; 0046-0047; as shown in Fig. 3-4C). Regarding claim 11, Barnett teaches the machine as in claim 2, wherein said accessory members comprise at least one of either a jug suitable to contain milk, or a steam delivery lance, and said additional packets of data or programs are associated with operating functions suitable for the preparation of milk foam and/or steam (para. 0002; 0032). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: US 2019/0380529, US 2019/0223653 and TWM528703. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALBA T ROSARIO-APONTE whose telephone number is (571)272-9325. The examiner can normally be reached M to F; 8am-5pm. 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, Steven Crabb can be reached at 571-270-5095. 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. /ALBA T ROSARIO-APONTE/Examiner, Art Unit 3761 08/14/2026 /ELIZABETH M KERR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 19, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 26, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12746620
SINGLE-BEAM DOUBLE-PHYSICAL-EFFECT COORDINATING AND DISTRIBUTING METHOD APPLICABLE TO UNIFORM LASER SHOCK AND APPLICATION THEREOF
4y 7m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12728474
ARC WELDING TORCH
4y 5m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12696995
BEVERAGE PREPARATION MACHINE WITH CAPSULE RECOGNITION
6y 7m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12697673
WELDING GUIDING SYSTEM PROVIDING HIGH-QUALITY IMAGES
6y 2m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12696356
ELECTRIC BLANKET
4y 0m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
55%
Grant Probability
81%
With Interview (+25.2%)
3y 10m (~1y 4m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 493 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month