DETAILED ACTION
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.
Claims 1-5, 8, and 13, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watson et al. (US 2011/0129589) in view of Davis (US 2017/0233688) and also Singleton (US 2025/0215365).
Regarding claims 1 and 13, Watson discloses a system for controlling alcohol distillation. See paragraph 0062. Watson discloses wherein the system is designed to control a mash under conditions optimized by an adaptive computerized control system, and wherein the chemical composition data of the spirit is monitored during production, and production parameters are adjusted in real time. See paragraphs 0074-0075. Watson discloses wherein the system uses a combination of traditional and vacuum distillation. See paragraphs 0045-0046 (i.e. pressure control). Watson discloses utilization of an accelerated aging process. See paragraph 0018. Watson discloses a flexible production interface for user control in paragraphs 0083-0084, but there is no mention of a comprehensive chemical profile (i.e. chemical fingerprint) of the final product which is compared to a comprehensive quality assurance database for authentication and verification performed by AI with recommended modifications. However, these concepts are established with regard to spirit production, as the distillation system of Davis discloses chemical analysis fingerprints with flavor modeling and iterative analysis in paragraphs 0041, 0052, and 0096. The distillation system of Singleton discloses AI analysis and control in paragraph 0058. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing, to consider these concepts with the Watson system, in order to maintain quality and consistency.
Regarding claim 2, Watson discloses an ultrasonic aging system in paragraph 0019.
Regarding claim 3, Watson discloses analytical instrumentation for real-time control based upon chemical analysis of the distillation process. See paragraphs 0074-0075.
Regarding claims 4 and 8, Singleton discloses learning algorithms based upon flavor outcomes and predictive modeling in paragraph 0058. The use of this AI optimization concept would be obvious to use with the Watson system as described above with regard to claim 1.
Regarding claim 5, Watson does not disclose a message queue subsystem. However, this is disclosed by Singleton in paragraphs 0166-0167. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing to consider such with the Watson system, so as to have efficient processing.
Claims 9-11 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watson et al. (US 2011/0129589) in view of Davis et al (US 2017/0233688).
Regarding claim 9, Watson discloses a system for controlling alcohol distillation. See paragraph 0062. Watson discloses wherein the system is designed to control a mash under conditions optimized by an adaptive computerized control system, and wherein the chemical composition data of the spirit is monitored during production, and production parameters are adjusted in real time. See paragraphs 0074-0075. Watson discloses wherein the system uses a combination of traditional and vacuum distillation. See paragraphs 0045-0046 (i.e. pressure control). Watson discloses utilization of an accelerated aging process. See paragraph 0018.
Watson discloses a user control interface in paragraphs 0083-0084, but there is no mention of a comprehensive chemical profile of the final product which is compared to a comprehensive quality assurance database. However, this concept is established with regard to spirit production, as is disclosed by the distillation system of Davis in paragraphs 0041, 0052, and 0096. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing, to consider this with the Watson system, in order to maintain quality and consistency.
Regarding claims 10-11, Watson discloses continuous flow and rapid thermal cycling in at least paragraphs 0046-0047.
Regarding claim 14, Davis discloses wherein a user can provide inputs of desired flavor characteristics and generate suggested production parameters in paragraph 0096. The use of such a concept with the Watson production system would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing, in order to generate various flavor characteristics.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 and 12 would be allowable if rewritten to include the base claim and any intervening claims. The prior does not teach or suggest the claimed specifics regarding the alcohol removal.
Claim 7 is objected to as depending from a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten to include the base claim and any intervening claims, as the prior art does teach or suggest the claimed analytical specifics.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY A MUSSELMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1814. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 8:00AM - 4:00PM.
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, PETER S VASAT can be reached at 571-570-7625. 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.
TIMOTHY A. MUSSELMAN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3715
/TIMOTHY A MUSSELMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights