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 claims 1-16 in the reply filed on 08/04/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 17-19 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 08/04/2026.
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 2 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.
Regarding claim 2, the limitation “a porosity ≤ 0.5 µm” renders the claim indefinite because porosity is conventionally expressed as a fraction, a percentage or volume ratio. It appears that the limitation is meant for a pore size/diameter. Examiner requests the applicant to provide a clarification.
Regarding claim 10, the limitation “has a constant output performance” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear what parameters are being considered in determining output performance of the pump.
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) 1-11 and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fantappie et al. (WO 2020/236666A1), in view of Amon al. (US 4051034).
Regarding claim 1, Fantappie teaches (refer fig. 1A-1D, Fig. 2A) a household appliance for dispensing drinking water enriched with a gas, the household appliance comprising:
an outlet (refer spigot/nozzle 44) through which the enriched drinking water can be tapped,
a flow-through enrichment unit upstream of the outlet for enriching the drinking water with the gas (refer fig. 2A disclosing carbon dioxide from tank 26 mixed with drinking water),
a receptacle for a container (refer 26) with the gas (refer fig. 1A),
an inlet upstream of the flow-through enrichment unit, via which the drinking water can be fed to the flow-through enrichment unit (water to be filtered/enriched is supplied from source 80),
wherein the inlet is equipped with a first filter (refer filters 82 and 84) for filtering the drinking water.
Fantappie does not teach that the outlet is additionally equipped with a second filter for filtering the enriched drinking water.
Amon teaches a beverage dispenser comprising water filter incorporated in the system between the carbonator and dispenser for safety factor purposes (abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the appliance of Fantappie to include a second filter downstream of mixing of carbon dioxide with water to provide filtration of carbonated water as taught by Kirschner.
Regarding claim 2, modified Fantappie teaches limitations of claim 1 as set forth above. Selecting type of filter would have been an obvious matter of choice to one of ordinary skill in the art to achieve desired quality of filtration.
Regarding claim 3, modified Fantappie teaches limitations of claim 1 as set forth above. Fantappie teaches that the filter is replaceable (refer [0247]) and Amon teaches that the second filter is connected to a hose to an outlet (refer fig. 1).
Regarding claim 4, modified Fantappie teaches limitations of claim 1 as set forth above. Fantappie teaches providing a nozzle/spigot (refer 44) connected to outlet.
Regarding claim 5, modified Fantappie teaches limitations of claim 1 as set forth above. Fantappie teaches that the first filter is provided as a stage of an overall multi-stage filter cartridge (Refer fig. 1 disclosing filters 82 and 84).
Regarding claim 6, modified Fantappie teaches limitations of claim 1 as set forth above. Fantappie teaches that filters (82, 84) are replaceable (refer [0247]). The filter inherently comprises a container/tank. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to select whether to provide filter in the order it is disclosed or in reversable position since Fantappie discloses that any types of filters can be selected (refer [0123]).
Regarding claim 7, modified Fantappie teaches limitations of claim 1 as set forth above. Fantappie teaches that the first filter is provide as a stage of multistage filter cartridge (Refer two filters 82 and 84 are disclosed). The filter inherently comprises a container/tank.
Regarding claim 8, modified Fantappie teaches limitations of claim 1 as set forth above. Fantappie teaches that the appliance further comprises a bypass line which connects the inlet to the outlet in parallel with the flow-through enrichment unit (refer fig. 2A).
Regarding claim 9, modified Fantappie teaches limitations of claim 1 as set forth above. Fantappie teaches that the appliance has an electronic control module that is electrical communication with the water delivery pump, the water valve, the sparkling water valve, the carbon dioxide gas valve and the chilled water valve to open and close those valves and to power the deliver pump on or off (refer [0021]). Selecting to turn valves on and off to provide desired flow pattern would have been an obvious matter of choice to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 10, modified Fantappie teaches limitations of claim 1 as set forth above. Fantappie teaches that the appliance comprises a feed pump (92) to supply drinking water to the enrichment unit from the inlet (refer fig. 2A).
Regarding claim 11, modified Fantappie teaches limitations of claim 1 as set forth above. Fantappie teaches that the flow-through enrichment unit has a flow-through chamber and a downstream mixing and calming chamber (refer carbonator devices 120 and 120 that are connected in series). (the limitation “is configured to flow a drinking water flow through the flow-through chamber and to supply a flow of the gas to the drinking water flow, wherein a resulting fluid flow is mixed in the mixing and calming chamber” is reciting functional limitation without imparting additional structure. The structure of Fantappie with two carbonator devices 120 and 121 provides means/chamber/space for mixing of carbon dioxide and water).
Regarding claim 13, modified Fantappie teaches limitations of claim 11 as set forth above. Modified Fantappie does not disclose volume of the mixing and calming chamber, however, selecting a size of the chamber would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art. Court has held that “mere scaling up of a prior art process capable of being scaled up, if such were the case, would not establish patentability in a claim to an old process so scaled." 531 F.2d at 1053, 189 USPQ at 148.
Regarding claim 14, modified Fantappie teaches limitations of claim 11 as set forth above. Modified Fantappie does not disclose material of the mixing and calming chamber. However, selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fantappie et al. (WO 2020/236666A1), in view of Amon al. (US 4051034) as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of EP’343 (EP 1219343A1).
Regarding claim 12, modified Fantappie teaches limitations of claim 1 as set forth above. Modified Fantappie does not teach a separating plate is arranged between the flow-through chamber and the mixing and calming chamber, wherein an opening is provided in the separating plate, which has a smaller cross-section compared to a flow cross-section in the flow-through chamber.
EP’343 teaches an assembly for enriching a fluid medium with a gas (refer abstract), wherein a plurality of enrichment units are provided for enriching the drinking water with gas (refer units 11 through 14), wherein the enrichment units have a flow through chamber and a downstream mixing an calming chamber, a separating plate (refer plate 46) is arranged between the flow-through chamber and the mixing and calming chamber, wherein an opening (refer openings 46, 48) is provided in the separating plate, which has a smaller cross-section compared to a flow cross-section in the flow-through chamber (refer fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of invention to modify the enrichment unit of modified Fantappie to provide a separating plate is arranged between the flow-through chamber and the mixing and calming chamber, wherein an opening is provided in the separating plate, which has a smaller cross-section compared to a flow cross-section in the flow-through chamber to provide sufficient level of mixing of gas with the fluid as taught by EP’343.
Claim(s) 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fantappie et al. (WO 2020/236666A1), in view of Amon al. (US 4051034) as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of DE’116 (DE9010116U1, refer English language machine translation for claim mapping).
Regarding claim 15, modified Fantappie teaches limitations of claim 11 as set forth above. Modified Fantappie does not teach based on an orientation of the appliance, the flow chamber is arranged above the mixing and calming chamber and the drinking water enriched with the gas is discharged at the bottom of the mixing and calming chamber.
DE’116 teaches a device for dissolving gas in liquid (refer fig. 1, para [0003]), wherein flow chamber (1) is arranged above the mixing and calming chamber (3) and the drinking water enriched with the gas is discharged at the bottom of the mixing and calming chamber (refer outlet at bottom).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of invention to modify the enrichment unit of modified Fantappie to provide flow chamber arranged above the mixing and calming chamber and the drinking water enriched with the gas is discharged at the bottom of the mixing and calming chamber to improve saturation of gas in liquid as taught by DE’116.
Regarding claim 16, modified Fantappie teaches limitations of claim 15 as set forth above. Modified Fantappie does not teach that the second filter is arranged in an upper half of the appliance, relative to an orientation of the appliance, and the drinking water enriched with the gas is guided upwards from the mixing and calming chamber to the second filter via a connecting line. However, court has held that rearrangement of parts or particular placement of the part is an obvious modification to one of ordinary skill in the art. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
EP0296570A1 teaches a carbonating system wherein carbonator is made from molded plastic material.
GB2590533 teaches a filter (71) for filtering carbonated liquid.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PRANAV PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-5142. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6AM-4PM.
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, Bobby Ramdhanie can be reached at (571) 270-3240. 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.
/PRANAV N PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1779
Prosecution Insights