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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group II (claims 9-15 & 20) in the reply filed on 06/08/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that assigned claims 16-19 into Group II, which each depending directly or indirectly from claim 1, which is a method claim.
The Office agrees with Applicant that claims 16-19 are method claims depending from directly or indirectly method claim 1; which appears to be overlooked by the office and inappropriately grouped with Group II. Therefore, claims 16-19 have been re-grouped with the non-elected method Group I (claims 1-8 & 16-19).
The Office reached out to Applicant via phone interview on June 29th., 2026 to confirm the election of the apparatus claims of Group II in light of the latest adjustment to the grouping.
Applicant confirmed to proceed with the examination and election of the apparatus claims of Group II (claims 9-15 & 20).
Further, applicant argues that the shared “special technical feature” is a machine-washing containers and filling the containers with a controlled temperature beverage. Special features don’t appear to be disclosed by the applied art WO 2008095576.
The Office as previously explained believes that such broadly shared technical features were clearly suggested by ‘576, see for example (Figs. 1-3; via GG, thermal balance point & HH, delivered heat & CC, filled containers and/or abstract; “heated during the pasteurization process, and are then cooled”).
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “filling installation for filling containers”, “washing machine for washing”, filler for filling”, “pasteurizer for pasteurizing”, and “heat exchanging unit for transferring” in claim 9.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 9-15 & 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Wiedemann et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2005/0126656).
Regarding claim 9: Wiedemann discloses a filling installation for filling containers made of glass, with a beverage (paragraph 0005; via filling “glass bottles”), comprising: a washing machine for washing and consequently releasing the containers in a heated state for subsequent filling (Fig. 1D; via 84 before filling 85; paragraph 0067; via zone tanks “washout systems”); a filler for filling the containers with the beverage (Fig. 1D; via 85 & paragraph 0087; “a filler valve”); and a pasteurizer for pasteurizing the filled containers (Fig. 4; via “pasteurizer segments 26”), with a temperature- control zone for cooling the pasteurized containers to an outlet temperature, comprising a heat exchanger unit for transferring to the beverage to be filled heat obtained during cooling to outlet temperature, see for example (paragraph 0005; “heat can be exchanged”, paragraph 0015; “a recuperative heat exchange” & “The present application thereby teaches that the use of a heat exchanger in the cold beverage stream upstream of the filling machine ensures a significantly more effective transfer of heat”).
Regarding claim 10: further comprising a water circuit for transporting the heat from the temperature-control zone to the heat exchanger unit and for transporting from the heat exchanger unit to the temperature-control zone cold extracted from the beverage there by heat transfer (paragraph 0050; “cold or hot water circulation for the optimal utilization of the energy of the hot and/or cold water”).
Regarding claim 11: further comprising a cold-water tank, integrated into the water circuit upstream of the temperature- control zone (abstract; “hot water tanks”).
Regarding claim 12: further comprising a beverage tank arranged between the heat exchanger unit and the filler for temporarily storing the heated beverage, see for example (Figs. 1 & 1B; and paragraph 0015; “a recuperative heat exchange” & “a heat exchanger in the cold beverage stream upstream of the filling machine ensures a significantly more effective transfer of heat”).
Regarding claim 13: further comprising a heater arranged between the beverage tank and the filler and/or between the heat exchanger unit and the filler for additionally heating the beverage, in particular when starting up the filling installation, see for example (Figs. 1 & 1B; and paragraph 0015; “a recuperative heat exchange” & “a heat exchanger in the cold beverage stream upstream of the filling machine ensures a significantly more effective transfer of heat”).
Regarding claim 14: further comprising at least one further heat exchanger unit connected upstream on the product side with an associated water circuit for transferring cold from the beverage to at least one further cold consumer (paragraph 0052 “Between the heating and cooling sections, heat can be exchanged”).
Regarding claim 15: wherein the filler is designed for filling at a fill temperature of the beverage of at least 15°C, see for example (paragraph 0043; “spray temperature of 18 degree C…the treated products…temperature of approximately 17 degree C.”).
Regarding claim 20: wherein the filler is designed for filling at a fill temperature of the beverage from 25 to 35°C (paragraph 0043; “slightly higher than 24 degree C”).
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.
Claim(s) 9-15 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wiedemann et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2005/0126656).
Claims 9-15 & 20 are rejected as stated above and suggested by Wiedemann. However, Wiedemann might be not very clearly suggesting a specific orientation and positioning of the claimed tanks.
It is noted that since the claimed elements suggested by the applied art, a specific location and arrangements would be nothing more than rearranging parts matter involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Further, coming up with a specific heating temperature of the filled beverage, would have been obvious, since it has been held that delivering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F. 2d 272, 205 USPQ 215.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. For example, most of the cited references in the PTO-892 appears to be related to similar type of filling installation for filling containers as suggested by the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMEH TAWFIK whose telephone number is (571)272-4470. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 8:00 AM - 4:00 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, Shelle Self can be reached at 571-272-4524. 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.
/SAMEH TAWFIK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731
Prosecution Insights