DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Restriction to one of the following inventions is required under 35 U.S.C. 121:
I. Claims 1-4, drawn to a utility holder, classified in A47K 5/1217.
II. Claims 5-14, drawn to a liquid dispenser system, classified in B67D 1/0871.
The inventions are independent or distinct, each from the other because:
Inventions I and II are related as combination and subcombination. Inventions in this relationship are distinct if it can be shown that (1) the combination as claimed does not require the particulars of the subcombination as claimed for patentability, and (2) that the subcombination has utility by itself or in other combinations (MPEP § 806.05(c)). In the instant case, the combination as claimed does not require the particulars of the subcombination as claimed because all of the limitations of Group II are not found in Group 1. The subcombination has separate utility such as a dispensing system that utilizes a sensing module, processing module, and communication module for displaying values associated with sensing signals for use in inventory control..
The examiner has required restriction between combination and subcombination inventions. Where applicant elects a subcombination, and claims thereto are subsequently found allowable, any claim(s) depending from or otherwise requiring all the limitations of the allowable subcombination will be examined for patentability in accordance with 37 CFR 1.104. See MPEP § 821.04(a). Applicant is advised that if any claim presented in a divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is allowable in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or nonstatutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application.
Restriction for examination purposes as indicated is proper because all the inventions listed in this action are independent or distinct for the reasons given above and there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required because one or more of the following reasons apply:
--the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art in view of their different classification;
--the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art due to their recognized divergent subject matter; and/or
--the inventions require a different field of search (e.g., searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search strategies or search queries).
Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete must include (i) an election of an invention to be examined even though the requirement may be traversed (37 CFR 1.143) and (ii) identification of the claims encompassing the elected invention.
The election of an invention may be made with or without traverse. To reserve a right to petition, the election must be made with traverse. If the reply does not distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election shall be treated as an election without traverse. Traversal must be presented at the time of election in order to be considered timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are added after the election, applicant must indicate which of these claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
During a telephone conversation with Mr. Ernest Buff on 23 June 2025 a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of Group II, claims 5-14. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action.
Claims 1-4 are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because of the following:
Figures 1B and 2B: Lines, numbers and letters not uniformly thick and well defined, clean, durable, and black (poor line quality).
- The structural components of the holder (100) appear to be missing from Figure 1B.
- The darkness of the figure makes it difficult to see details of the structure presented within Figure 2B.
Figures 2A-2E: Numbers, letters, and reference characters must be at least .32 cm (1/8 inch) in height. See 37 C.F.R. 1.84(p)(3).
The numeral and text used with the figures are less than 1/8 inch in height.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “200” has been used to designate both a “liquid dispensing system”, as shown in Figures 2A, 2C, and 2D and a “liquid level sensing device/container”, also shown in Figures 2A, 2C, and 2D.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “200” has been used to designate both a “handheld liquid level sensing device”, as shown in Figure 2A and a “liquid level sensing device/container”, also shown in Figures 2C and 2D.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “202” has been used to designate both an “ultrasonic liquid level sensor”, as shown in Figure 2A and a “container”, as shown in Figure 3.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “204” has been used to designate both an “LED screen”, as shown in Figure 2A and a “communication module”, as shown in Figure 3.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “206” has been used to designate both a “battery slot”, as shown in Figure 2E and a “server”, as shown in Figure 3.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "206", as shown in Figure 3 and "209", as shown in Figure 2C-2D have both been used to designate a server.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Paragraph [], line
Paragraph [0036], lines 4 and 7: The term – enclosure – should replace the term “Enclosure.”
Paragraph [0045], line 2: Reference numeral – 100 – should replace reference numeral “106.”
Paragraph [0048], line 3: Reference numeral “200” has been previously used to represent the liquid dispensing system (see Figure 2A). Should this numeral be corrected to read – 204 --?
Paragraph [0050], line 11: The term – hospitality – should replace the term “Hospitality.”
Paragraph [0052], line 3: A – comma – should be inserted prior to the term “such.”
Paragraph [0054], line 2: A – comma – should be inserted prior to the term “such.”
Paragraph [0057], lines 5 and 7: Reference numeral “202” has been previously used to represent a container (paragraph [0043], line 3).
Paragraph [0058], line 2: Reference numeral “204” has been previously used to represent a communication module (paragraph [0052], line 2).
Paragraph [0058], line 4: A – comma – should be inserted prior to the term “such.”
Paragraph [0059], line 4: Reference numeral “202” has been previously used to represent a container (paragraph [0043], line 3).
Paragraph [0059], line 5: Reference numeral “204” has been previously used to represent a communication module (paragraph [0052], line 2).
Paragraph [0059], line 7: Reference numeral “206” has been previously used to represent a server (paragraph [0052], line 2).
Paragraph [0061], line 2: Reference numeral “202” has been previously used to represent a container (paragraph [0043], line 3).
Paragraph [0061], line 4: Reference numeral “204” has been previously used to represent a communication module (paragraph [0052], line 2).
Paragraph [0063], line 5: Reference numeral “202” has been previously used to represent a container (paragraph [0043], line 3).
Paragraph [0063], line 6: Reference numeral “204” has been previously used to represent a communication module (paragraph [0052], line 2).
Paragraph [0059], line 7: Reference numeral “206” has been previously used to represent a server (paragraph [0052], line 2).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 5-14 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Re claim 5, claim line 8: The article – the – should be inserted prior to the term “at”; and the term “them” should be replaced with the term – the signals – to avoid confusion.
Re claim 5, claim line 9: The term – configured – should be inserted prior to the term “for” to positively recite the functionality/intended use of the values.
Re claim 5, claim line 10: The term – configured – should be inserted prior to the term “for” to positively recite the functionality/intended use of the network.
Re claim 6, claim line 1: The article “A” should be replaced with – The --.
Re claim 6, claim line 1: The term – configured – should be inserted prior to the term “for” to positively recite the functionality/intended use of the transducers.
Re claim 7, claim line 1: The article “A” should be replaced with – The --.
Re claim 8, claim line 1: The article “A” should be replaced with – The --.
Re claim 9, claim line 1: The article “A” should be replaced with – The --.
Re claim 10, claim line 1: The article “A” should be replaced with – The --.
Re claim 11, claim line 1: The article “A” should be replaced with – The --.
Re claim 12, claim line 1: The article “A” should be replaced with – The --.
Re claim 12, claim line 1: The phrase “the handheld device” lacks antecedent basis. The handheld device was previously recited in claim 11, however, claim 12 does not depend from claim 11.
Re claim 13, claim line 1: The article “A” should be replaced with – The --.
Re claim 13, claim line 2: The term – configured – should be inserted prior to the term “for” to positively recite the functionality/intended use of the mobile device.
Re claim 14, claim line 1: The article “A” should be replaced with – The --.
Re claim 14, claim line 1: The phrase “the handheld device” lacks antecedent basis. The handheld device was previously recited in claim 11, however, claim 14 does not depend from claim 11.
Re claim 14, claim line 2: The term – configured – should be inserted prior to the term “for” to positively recite the functionality/intended use of the mobile device.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 11 recites that the liquid dispenser system is housed within a handheld device. Claim 5, which claim 11 depends from, recites, "A liquid dispenser system, comprising: a dispensing unit having a holder and a container to hold a liquid to be dispensed The written disclosure does not describe a handheld device that includes a dispenser, holder, and container to hold a liquid. Rather, what is described is a handheld device which communicates with a sensor connected to a container. Thus, it is the position of the Examiner of record that the claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
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 5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2017/0336244 (Moore).
With respect to the limitations of claim 5, Moore discloses a liquid dispenser system (300, [0021], [0033]), comprising:
a dispensing unit having a holder and a container to hold a liquid to be dispensed (housing 202 holds refill unit 204 which contains liquid soap – paragraphs [0019], [0021] and Figure 2);
at least one ultrasonic sensor coupled to a body of the holder to measure the amount of liquid within the container (sensor 226, which is housed within housing 202, is an ultrasonic sensor that detects a level of soap - paragraphs [0027], [0030], and Figure 2); and
an electronic unit coupled to the dispensing unit (processor 220 – paragraphs [0023] and Figure 2) and including a sensing module (to receive signals from sensor 226 - paragraph [0027]), a processing module (to make determinations based upon the sensed level - paragraph [0034]), and a communication module (for sending data via transceiver 302 - paragraph [0033]) which enable the electronic unit to receive signals from at least one ultrasonic sensor (receive signals from sensor 226 – paragraph [0027]), process them to provide values for display on a display device (display 224, - paragraphs [0023] and [0026]) and communicate the values to a remote server over a network for inventory management (sending data via transceiver 302 - paragraph [0033]).
With respect to the limitations of claim 7, Moore further discloses that the liquid
within said container is liquid soap (housing 202 holds refill unit 204 which contains liquid soap - paragraphs [0019], [0021] and Figure 2).
Claims 5 and 8-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DE 102019110817 (Derichsweller et al.).
With respect to the limitations of claim 5, Derichsweiler et al. disclose a liquid dispenser system, comprising:
a dispensing unit having a holder and a container to hold a liquid to be dispensed (beverage containers (6) containing a beverage/liquid are held in a receptacle/crate (2) – paragraph [0046] and Figure 1);
at least one ultrasonic sensor coupled to a body of the holder to measure the amount of liquid within the container (to determine fill level, fill level detectors (10), such as an ultrasonic sensor (30) are assigned to a receiving area (4) of the holder (2) (i.e., coupled to a body of the holder (2)) to measure the amount of liquid with the container (6) – paragraphs [0046]; [0051] and Figure 1); and
an electronic unit coupled to the dispensing unit (analysis arrangement (8/12) containing a control unit (16) is attached/coupled to the receptacle (2) – paragraphs [0046-0047] and Figure 2) and including a sensing module (receiving signals from detectors (10)- paragraph [0047]), a processing module (creating digital information signal I – paragraph [0059]), and a communication module (utilizing transponder (24) to transmit data – paragraph [0050]), which enable the electronic unit to receive signals from at least one ultrasonic sensor (fill level detectors (10) signal readings to the control unit (16) – paragraph [0057]), process them to provide values for display on a display device (digital fill level data is generated by control unit (16) and sent to local optical signal generator – paragraphs [0053]) and communicate the values to a remote server over a network for inventory management (information signal I can also be transmitted to a data processing device in the form of a data processing network DVN for purposes of determining consumption data – see description of Figures 5 and 6).
With respect to the limitations of claims 8-10, Derichsweiler et al. disclose that the liquid within the container is an alcoholic beverage (beverage whose fill level is being determined can be located within spirit bottles or wine or beer barrels).
With respect to the limitation of claim 11, Derichsweiler et al. further disclose that the liquid dispenser system is housed within a handheld device (some portion of the liquid dispenser system is housed within a handheld device as the data processing may be performed by a handheld device, such as a smartphone – paragraph [0060], and Figure 5).
With respect to the limitation of claim 12, Derichsweiler et al. further disclose a handheld device is configured to be associated with a beer keg to measure the remaining liquid level of beer therein (the fill level of beverage containers, such as beer barrels, is processed by a handheld device, such as a smartphone – paragraph [0025] and [0060] and Figures 5 and 6).
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 6 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE (Derichsweller et al.) in view of US 2022/0299354 Cunnah et al.
With respect to the limitations of claim 6, Derichsweiler et al. disclose all of the limitations of the base claim; but fail to disclose dual transducers for implementing a dual transducer measurement technique that provides accurate readings of the amount of said liquid with minimal resolution, whereby lower levels of said liquid within said container are accurately measured.
Cunnah et al. discloses dual transducers (both speaker (105) and microphone (107) are transducers, [0080]) for implementing a dual transducer measurement technique (using system (10) for the determination of the fill level of container (30) – paragraph [0079] and Figure 1) that provides accurate readings of the amount of a liquid with minimal resolution, whereby lower levels of said liquid within said container are accurately measured (determination of levels has improved accuracy – paragraph [0145]). Modifying Derichsweiler et al. with dual transducers would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to introduce a technique that provides accurate readings of the amount of said liquid with minimal resolution, whereby lower levels of said liquid within said container are accurately measured as disclosed by Cunnah et al. in order to improve accuracy of level measurement (paragraph [0145]).
With respect to the limitations of claim 13, Derichsweiler et al. discloses all of the limitations of the base claim and all intervening claims; but fail to disclose calibration means for selecting a specific container size and adjusting settings of said calibration means to match dimensions of said container.
Cunnah et al. discloses calibration means for selecting a specific container size and adjusting settings of said calibration means to match dimensions of said container (calibration means may be provided as a table of different container types, i.e. dimensions – paragraphs [0091] and [0124]). Modifying Derichsweiler et al. with using calibration means for selecting a specific container size and adjusting settings of said calibration means to match dimensions of said container would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention in order to allow the device to be able to determine the fill level of any given cylinder or tank (paragraph [0091]).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2017/0336244 (Moore) in view of US 2022/0306446 (Affan et al.).
With respect to the limitations of claim 14, Moore discloses all of the limitations of the base claim and all intervening claims including calibration means for selecting a specific container size and adjusting settings of said calibration means to match dimensions of said container (input (227) receives information on the number of doses if more than one refill size is used - paragraph [0031]). Moore fails to disclose a mobile device.
Affan et al. discloses a liquid level measurement system comprising a mobile device (a smartphone may be used to input preferences into the system - paragraph [0051]). Modifying Moore with a mobile device would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention in order to receive input from a user (paragraph [0051] – Affan et al. and paragraph [0031] - Moore).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The prior art discloses a consumption device utilizing an ultrasonic sensor.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL SEAN LARKIN whose telephone number is 571-272-2198. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM - 5:30 PM.
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, Laura Sweeney can be reached at 571-272-2160. 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.
/DANIEL S LARKIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights