DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the AIA first to file provisions. 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 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.
Application Status
This office action is in response to the claims filed 6/12/2024.
Claims 1-9 are currently pending and being examined.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The IDS filed on 6/12/2024 has been considered. See the attached PTO 1449 forms.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hashimoto et al. US 5,871,121.
Regarding claim 1:
Hashimoto teaches a carbon dioxide gas supply apparatus comprising:
a pressure adjuster (51a/51b) including a primary-side port and a secondary-side port and configured to adjust a pressure of a carbon dioxide gas supplied from a carbon dioxide gas supply source (1) to the primary-side port and send the carbon dioxide gas from the secondary-side port (shown in FIG. 1);
a relief valve (10a/10b) connected to a first channel configured to connect the secondary-side port and a beverage barrel (7a/7b); and
a controller (90) configured to control the pressure adjuster and the relief valve, wherein the controller controls the relief valve such that a pressure in the first channel is reduced in accordance with an output of a temperature sensor (81) configured to detect a temperature of a beverage sent from the beverage barrel to a beverage server (col. 4, lines 38-63).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hashimoto, as applied above.
Regarding claim 7:
Hashimoto teaches the carbon dioxide gas supply apparatus according to claim 1, as discussed above, but does not teach further comprising a safety valve connected to a position between the pressure adjuster and a connecting portion of the relief valve in the first channel.
However, Examiner takes official notice that safety valves are old and well-known in the art for providing means to maintain pressures at safe operating conditions, and it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, at the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Hashimoto by providing a safety valve connected to a position between the pressure adjuster and a connecting portion of the relief valve in the first channel, in order to have increased control over the optimal pressure in the apparatus.
Claims 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hashimoto, as applied above, and further in view of Tomohiro JP 2014201333 (provided in IDS).
Regarding claim 8:
Hashimoto teaches the carbon dioxide gas supply apparatus according to claim 1, as discussed above, but does not teach wherein the pressure adjuster includes: a pressure intensifying valve configured to increase the pressure in the first channel; and a pressure reducing valve configured to reduce the pressure in the first channel.
Tomohiro discloses a pressure adjuster for a related beverage server apparatus also utilizing a temperature sensor, wherein the pressure adjuster includes: a pressure intensifying valve (1) configured to increase the pressure in the first channel; and a pressure reducing valve (2) configured to reduce the pressure in the first channel, teaching “[t]he control device 4 decides the optimal pressurizing pressure supplied from the gas cylinder to the [beverage] barrel on the basis of a detection signal of the temperature sensor, and controls the opening/closing of the pressurizing solenoid valve and the decompressing solenoid valve according to the pressure value to supply the gas of the optimal pressurizing pressure to the [beverage] barrel” (abstract).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, at the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Hashimoto by replacing the pressure adjuster with the pressure adjuster of Tomohiro, having a pressure intensifying valve configured to increase the pressure in the first channel and a pressure reducing valve configured to reduce the pressure in the first channel, since Tomohiro discloses doing so can help to control the pressure to be optimal for the beverage to be dispensed.
Regarding claim 9:
The combination of Hashimoto and Tomohiro teaches the carbon dioxide gas supply apparatus according to claim 8, as discussed above, wherein when reducing the pressure in the first channel to reduce the pressure in the beverage barrel, the controller opens the relief valve in accordance with a target pressure in a state in which the pressure reducing valve is closed (Tomohiro’s modification of Hashimoto is capable of being controlled in this manner, according to Hashimoto’s overall design utilizing Tomohiro’s pressure adjuster).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-6 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The prior art does not teach or render obvious providing a second channel configured to supply the carbon dioxide gas supplied from the carbon dioxide gas supply source to the relief valve to supply, to the relief valve, a force for maintaining the relief valve in a closed state.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DARIUSH SEIF whose telephone number is (408) 918-7542. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9:30 AM-6:00 PM PST.
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, ANNA KINSAUL can be reached on 571-270-1926. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DARIUSH SEIF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731