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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 04/14/2026 (hereinafter “amendment”) has been accepted and entered. Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 4-5, 11-12 and 18-19 are withdrawn as being directed to an unelected species.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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 1-3, 6-10, 13-17 and 20 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.
Claims 1, 8 and 15 recite “a plurality of substantially vertical support members that extend from the filter to a raised bottom” and “a screen positioned between the filter and the filter support structure”, this is unclear. How do the support members extend to the filter if there is a screen between the support members and the filter? Does the applicant mean the support members extend towards the filter? Extend to the screen? Do the support members go through the screen? For purposes of compact prosecution and in light of the specification the examiner will treat this as “support members that extend upwards towards the filter from a raised bottom”.
Claims not mentioned specifically are included due to their dependency.
The 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections of claim(s) 1-3, 6-10 and 13-17 from the previous office action are withdrawn as a result of the amendment.
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, 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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-10, 13-17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hansen US 2014/0072677 A1, in view of Wang et al. US 2015/0018441 A1 and Fond US 5,897,899, herein after referred to as Hansen, Wang and Fond.
Regarding claim 1 Hansen discloses a single-use container (1 cartridge, Figs. 1-6) comprising:
a container body (2 cup shaped body) comprising:
a rim (21 upper rim);
a sidewall (5 sidewall), wherein the sidewall comprises a plurality of ribs (28 flutes), and wherein each rib (28) of the plurality of ribs is arranged in an inward projecting pattern around the sidewall (Fig. 2);
a bottom (4 base);
a lid (3 lid) affixed to the rim (Fig. 1); and
a filter (8 filter) dividing the single-use container into a first compartment (interior of filter) and a second compartment (exterior of filter and below filter, Figs. 1-2), wherein the first compartment contains coffee grounds (7 beverage ingredients, paragraph [0068] lines 1-2),
a filter support structure (11 circumferential wall, Figs. 1-4) positioned between a filter (8 filter) and the bottom (4), wherein the filter support structure (11) comprises a plurality of substantially vertical support members (18 axially oriented bars, Figs. 1-4) that extend upward towards the filter (8) from a raised bottom (4a flat portion of base, Fig. 2), and wherein the filter support structure (11) is positioned off-center from a puncture location (where the piercing element 56 protrudes, Figs. 4 and 6) formed in the raised bottom (the filter support structure is centered around the center of the container and the puncture location is offset from the center of the container as shown in at least figure 4, thusly the support structure is off center from the punction location);
a footstool positioned (6 filter guard) within the single-use container (Figs. 1-4), the footstool comprising the filter (8), the filter support structure (11), and a screen (9 upper portion) positioned between the filter (8) and the filter support structure (11), wherein the screen distributes pressure from the filter support structure (11) across the screen (9) to prevent the filter support structure (11) from puncturing the filter (8), and wherein the screen is fixed to at least one of the filter support structure (11), the sidewall, or the filter.
Hansen is silent to the material used for the container body being aluminum 3004-H19 and the screen being constructed of a metal and that metal being aluminum.
Wang teaches an aluminum container (100) that is made from an aluminum alloy which is aluminum 3004-H19 (paragraph [0021]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the aluminum alloy 3004-H19 for the container as taught by Wang as doing so is well known in the art and would yield predictable results. Also, the alloy has good strength and formability so it can easily be manufactured as well as allow the user to avoid plastics. Further it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
Fond teaches a cartridge for beverages and that when a substance sensitive to oxidation is contained within a beverage cartridge, such as roast and ground coffee, it is desirable and well known to have the component of the cartridge to be made from materials substantially impervious to oxygen such as aluminum (Col. 3, lines 60-67).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the screen to be made from aluminum as doing so is well known in the art and would yield predicable results. Additionally using aluminum with help with the freshness of the coffee within the container. Further it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
Regarding claim 2 Hansen as modified discloses the single-use container of claim 1 and further discloses wherein an innermost layer of the sidewall comprises the aluminum alloy (the container is made from the aluminum alloy so the innermost layer is comprised of aluminum alloy).
Regarding claim 3 Hansen as modified discloses the single-use container of claim 1 and further discloses wherein the rim (21) comprises a flat top surface (Figs. 1-2 and 4);
the container body (2) comprises a stacking lip (20 open upper end, Fig. 2) positioned below the rim; and
the sidewall (5) comprises an inward tapering sidewall positioned below the stacking lip (Figs. 1 and 4).
Regarding claim 6 Hansen as modified discloses the single-use container of claim 1 and further discloses wherein the filter (8) comprises a paper filter (paragraph [0026], lines 3-5).
Regarding claim 7 Hansen as modified discloses the single-use container of claim 1 and further discloses wherein the aluminum alloy comprises aluminum 3004-H19 (Wang paragraph [0021]).
Regarding claim 8 Hansen discloses a single-use container (1 cartridge, Figs. 1-6) comprising:
a container body (2 cup shaped body) comprising:
a rim (21 upper rim);
a sidewall (5 sidewall);
a bottom (4 base);
a lid (3 lid) affixed to the rim (Fig. 1); and
a filter (8 filter) dividing the single-use container into a first compartment (interior of filter) and a second compartment (exterior of filter and below filter, Figs. 1-2), wherein the first compartment contains coffee grounds (7 beverage ingredients, paragraph [0068] lines 1-2),
a filter support structure (11 circumferential wall, Figs. 1-4) positioned between a filter (8 filter) and the bottom (4), wherein the filter support structure (11) comprises a plurality of substantially vertical support members (18 axially oriented bars, Figs. 1-4) that extend upward towards the filter (8) from a raised bottom (4a flat portion of base, Fig. 2), and wherein the filter support structure (11) is positioned off-center from a puncture location (where the piercing element 56 protrudes, Figs. 4 and 6) formed in the raised bottom (the filter support structure is centered around the center of the container and the puncture location is offset from the center of the container as shown in at least figure 4, thusly the support structure is off center from the punction location);
a footstool positioned (6 filter guard) within the single-use container (Figs. 1-4), the footstool comprising the filter (8), the filter support structure (11), and a screen (9 upper portion) positioned between the filter (8) and the filter support structure (11), wherein the screen distributes pressure from the filter support structure (11) across the screen (9) to prevent the filter support structure (11) from puncturing the filter (8), and wherein the screen is fixed to at least one of the filter support structure (11), the sidewall, or the filter.
Hansen is silent to the material used for the container body being aluminum 3104-H19 and the screen being constructed of a metal and that metal being aluminum.
Wang teaches an aluminum container (100) that is made from an aluminum alloy which is aluminum 3104-H19 (paragraph [0021]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the aluminum alloy 3104-H19 for the container as taught by Wang as doing so is well known in the art and would yield predictable results. Also, the alloy has good strength and formability so it can easily be manufactured as well as allow the user to avoid plastics. Further it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
Fond teaches a cartridge for beverages and that when a substance sensitive to oxidation is contained within a beverage cartridge, such as roast and ground coffee, it is desirable and well known to have the component of the cartridge to be made from materials substantially impervious to oxygen such as aluminum (Col. 3, lines 60-67).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the screen to be made from aluminum as doing so is well known in the art and would yield predicable results. Additionally using aluminum with help with the freshness of the coffee within the container. Further it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
Regarding claim 9 Hansen as modified discloses the single-use container of claim 8 and further discloses wherein an innermost layer of the sidewall comprises the aluminum alloy (the container is made from the aluminum alloy so the innermost layer is comprised of aluminum alloy).
Regarding claim 10 Hansen as modified discloses the single-use container of claim 8 and further discloses wherein the rim (21) comprises a flat top surface (Figs. 1-2 and 4);
the container body (2) comprises a stacking lip (20 open upper end, Fig. 2) positioned below the rim; and
the sidewall (5) comprises an inward tapering sidewall positioned below the stacking lip (Figs. 1 and 4).
Regarding claim 13 Hansen as modified discloses the single-use container of claim 8 and further discloses wherein the filter (8) comprises a paper filter (paragraph [0026], lines 3-5).
Regarding claim 14 Hansen as modified discloses the single-use container of claim 8 and further discloses wherein the aluminum alloy comprises aluminum 3104-H19 (Wang paragraph [0021]).
Regarding claim 15 Hansen discloses a single-use container (1 cartridge, Figs. 1-6) comprising:
a container body (2 cup shaped body) comprising:
a rim (21 upper rim);
a sidewall (5 sidewall);
a bottom (4 base);
a lid (3 lid) affixed to the rim (Fig. 1); and
a filter (8 filter) dividing the single-use container into a first compartment (interior of filter) and a second compartment (exterior of filter and below filter, Figs. 1-2), wherein the first compartment contains coffee grounds (7 beverage ingredients, paragraph [0068] lines 1-2),
a filter support structure (11 circumferential wall, Figs. 1-4) positioned between a filter (8 filter) and the bottom (4), wherein the filter support structure (11) comprises a plurality of substantially vertical support members (18 axially oriented bars, Figs. 1-4) that extend upward towards the filter (8) from a raised bottom (4a flat portion of base, Fig. 2), and wherein the filter support structure (11) is positioned off-center from a puncture location (where the piercing element 56 protrudes, Figs. 4 and 6) formed in the raised bottom (the filter support structure is centered around the center of the container and the puncture location is offset from the center of the container as shown in at least figure 4, thusly the support structure is off center from the punction location);
a footstool positioned (6 filter guard) within the single-use container (Figs. 1-4), the footstool comprising the filter (8), the filter support structure (11), and a screen (9 upper portion) positioned between the filter (8) and the filter support structure (11), wherein the screen distributes pressure from the filter support structure (11) across the screen (9) to prevent the filter support structure (11) from puncturing the filter (8), and wherein the screen is fixed to at least one of the filter support structure (11), the sidewall, or the filter.
Hansen is silent to the material used for the container body being aluminum 5182-H48 and the screen being constructed of a metal and that metal being aluminum.
Wang teaches an aluminum container (100) that is made from an aluminum alloy which is aluminum 5182-H48 (paragraph [0022] lines 5-7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the aluminum alloy 5182-H48 for the container as taught by Wang as doing so is well known in the art and would yield predictable results. Also, the alloy has good strength and formability so it can easily be manufactured as well as allow the user to avoid plastics. Further it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
Fond teaches a cartridge for beverages and that when a substance sensitive to oxidation is contained within a beverage cartridge, such as roast and ground coffee, it is desirable and well known to have the component of the cartridge to be made from materials substantially impervious to oxygen such as aluminum (Col. 3, lines 60-67).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the screen to be made from aluminum as doing so is well known in the art and would yield predicable results. Additionally using aluminum with help with the freshness of the coffee within the container. Further it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
Regarding claim 16 Hansen as modified discloses the single-use container of claim 15 and further discloses wherein an innermost layer of the sidewall comprises the aluminum alloy (the container is made from the aluminum alloy so the innermost layer is comprised of aluminum alloy).
Regarding claim 17 Hansen as modified discloses the single-use container of claim 15 and further discloses wherein the rim (21) comprises a flat top surface (Figs. 1-2 and 4);
the container body (2) comprises a stacking lip (20 open upper end, Fig. 2) positioned below the rim; and
the sidewall (5) comprises an inward tapering sidewall positioned below the stacking lip (Figs. 1 and 4).
Regarding claim 20 Hansen as modified discloses the single-use container of claim 15 and further discloses wherein the aluminum alloy comprises aluminum 3104-H19 (Wang paragraph [0021]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/14/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the Office Action does not identify disclosure in Karanikos, Wang or Hansen of “a footstool positioned within the single-use container, the footstool comprising the filter, the filter support structure, and a screen positioned between the filter and the filter support structure, wherein the screen is constructed from metal and distributes pressure from the filter support structure across the screen to prevent the filter support structure from puncturing the filter, and wherein the screen is constructed from aluminum and is fixed to at least one of the filter support structure, the sidewall, or the filter”. These amended limitations are identified in the Office Action above in the rejections of claims 1, 8 and 15 and are disclosed by the teachings of Hansen, Wang and Fond.
Applicant discusses that an interview was conducted and an agreement was reached. Applicant submitted proposed amendments and an opinion was given in a return voicemail explaining that it appeared the proposed language would overcome the art of record. The proposed amendments were a different variation to the submitted claim language. The current rejection of record has been amended in light of the submitted claims.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Lauren Kmet whose telephone number is (313)446-4834. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-6pm.
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, Anthony Stashick can be reached at (571) 272-4561. 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.
/L KMET/ Examiner, Art Unit 3735
/Anthony D Stashick/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3735
Prosecution Insights