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 .
Amendment filed July 29, 2026 has been acknowledged. Newly presented claims 34-35 have been entered. Claims 1, 6, 10, 17-21, 24-28, and 31-35 remain pending in the application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 25-26 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.
The scope of claim 25 is unclear because it does not specify the claim from which it depends.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 25-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Specifically, claim 25 does not specify the claim upon which it depends. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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, 6, 10, 19-21, 24, 27, and 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grundy (WO2015053837A2) in view of Brown (20020030102).
Regarding claim 1, Grundy discloses a consumer operable retail beverage container filling arrangement for use in a retail environment, comprising: a housing (100), a beverage dispensing unit (112) for dispensing a beverage, comprising a retail beverage container holder (floor of 102) for receiving and holding a retail beverage container, wherein the beverage dispensing unit is at least partially provided in the housing (Fig. 1); a consumer interaction module (101) for receiving a consumer input and generating a consumer control signal based on the received consumer input; and a dispensing controller (109) arranged for receiving the consumer control signal and controlling the beverage dispensing unit to dispense the beverage in accordance with the consumer control signal.
Grundy DIFFERS in that it does not disclose the beverage dispensing unit further comprises a beverage level optical sensor arranged to provide a level sensor signal indicative of a beverage level inside a retail beverage container held by the retail beverage container holder, and wherein the dispensing controller is further arranged for receiving the level sensor signal and for controlling the beverage dispensing unit according to the level sensor signal. Attention, however, is directed to the Brown reference, which discloses a beverage dispensing unit comprises a beverage level sensor arranged to provide a level sensor signal indicative of a beverage level inside a retail beverage container held by a retail beverage container holder, and wherein a dispensing controller is further arranged for receiving the level sensor signal and for controlling the beverage dispensing unit according to the level sensor signal (par. 0035-0036 and 0044). Brown further teaches that optical sensors are among a myriad of known sensor types that one of ordinary skill in the art may select (par. 0036).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Grundy reference in view of the teachings of the Brown reference by employing a beverage level optical sensor for the purpose of detecting the fill level and preventing overfilling.
Regarding claim 6, the beverage dispensing unit comprises a dispensing unit housing (100 of Grundy) defining a dispensing compartment (102 of Grundy); the retail beverage container holder is at least partially provided in the dispensing compartment; and the dispensing unit housing substantially separates the dispensing compartment from a storage area (interior of 100 of Grundy) comprised by the filling arrangement (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 10, the housing comprises a storage area for storing at least one of a supply beverage container (117, 118, 131 of Grundy), the housing comprises a storage area access opening for accessing the storage area and at least one housing door (110 of Grundy) for selectively opening or closing off the storage area access opening, and the beverage dispensing unit is at least partially provided in the housing door (Fig. 1 of Grundy).
Regarding claim 19, Grundy discloses a method of operating a consumer operable retail beverage container filling arrangement for filling a retail beverage container, comprising: by means of a consumer interaction module (101 of Grundy), receiving a consumer input and generating a consumer control signal based on the received consumer input (par. 00105-00110 of Grundy); by a beverage level optical sensor, providing a level sensor signal indicative of a beverage level inside the retail beverage container (par. 0035-0036 and 0044 of Brown); and by means of a dispensing controller, receiving the consumer control signal, and the level sensor signal, and based on the consumer control signal and the level sensor signal, controlling a beverage dispensing unit to dispense a beverage into the retail beverage container (par. 00105-00110 of Grundy; par. 0035-0036 and 0044 of Brown).
Regarding claim 20, the method further comprising: by means of a retail beverage container sensor (104 of Grundy), detecting a presence of a retail beverage container in a retail beverage container holder and sending a detection signal based on the detection; and by means of a dispensing controller, receiving the consumer control signal and the detection signal (par. 00107-00108 of Grundy); wherein the controlling of the beverage dispensing unit to dispense a beverage into the retail beverage container is also based on the detection signal (par. 00107-00108 of Grundy).
Regarding claim 21, the method further comprising dispensing the beverage against an inner wall (at least the bottom wall) of the retail beverage container.
Regarding claim 24, the beverage level optical sensor is placed outside the retail beverage container and the dispensing line (Fig. 1 of Brown).
Regarding claim 27, the position of the beverage level optical sensor relative to the retail beverage container holder can be varied (the level sensor can be installed at a variety of different locations).
Regarding claim 32, the method further comprising stopping the dispensing of the beverage by the dispensing controller when the level sensor signal is indicative of the retail beverage container being sufficiently filled (par. 0044).
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grundy in view of Brown as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Brown-Wilkinson (10863852).
Regarding claim 17, the beverage dispensing unit comprises a dispensing outlet (103 of Grundy; 31 of Brown), a supply beverage container coupler (62, 72, or 82 of Brown), and a dispensing line (64, 74, or 84 of Brown) providing a flow path for beverage between the supply beverage container and the dispensing outlet; the retail beverage container holder is arranged to hold the retail beverage container in a first orientation (Fig. 1 of Grundy; Fig. 1 of Brown).
Grundy DIFFERS in that it does not disclose the dispensing outlet is oriented to dispense beverage in a second orientation at an angle relative to the first orientation. Attention, however, is directed to the Brown-Wilkinson reference, which discloses a dispensing outlet is oriented to dispense beverage in a second orientation at an angle relative to a first orientation (par. 0021 and 0051).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the Grundy reference in view of the teachings of the Brown-Wilkinson reference by dispensing at an angle to minimize foaming (par. 0021 and 0051 of Brown-Wilkinson).
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grundy in view of Brown as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Rider et al. (20180327243).
Regarding claim 18, Grundy DIFFERS in that it does not disclose the beverage dispensing unit comprises a pressure unit arranged to receive pressurised gas from a pressurised gas container and to provide the pressurised gas to a retail beverage container held in the retail beverage container holder. Attention, however, is directed to the Rider reference, which discloses a beverage dispensing unit comprises a pressure unit arranged to receive pressurised gas from a pressurised gas container and to provide the pressurised gas to a retail beverage container (par. 0036-0037).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the Grundy reference in view of the teachings of the Rider reference by including a pressure unit arranged to receive pressurised gas from a pressurised gas container and to provide the pressurised gas to a retail beverage container for the purpose of determining the amount of beverage in the container (par. 0036 of Rider).
Claim(s) 25-26 and 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grundy in view of Brown as applied to claims 5 and 19 above, and further in view of Lyons et al. (10863852).
Regarding claims 25 and 31, Grundy DIFFERS in that it does not disclose the beverage level optical sensor comprises one or more light sources aimed such that at least part of light emitted by the one or more light sources can pass through a part of a retail beverage container held in the retail beverage container holder. Attention, however, is directed to the Lyons reference, which discloses a beverage level optical sensor comprises one or more light sources aimed such that at least part of light emitted by the one or more light sources can pass through a part of a retail beverage container held in a retail beverage container holder (col. 94, lines 17-50).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the Grundy reference in view of the teachings of the Lyons reference by employing a light source because Brown teaches that any suitable optical sensor may be used as a matter of preference (par. 0036 of Brown).
Regarding claim 26, the filling arrangement further comprising a light sensor arranged to receive the emitted light and to generate a level sensor signal based on the received light (col. 94, lines 17-50).
Claim(s) 28-29 and 33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grundy in view of Brown as applied to claims 1 and 19 above, and further in view of Bertolini et al. (20140270725).
Regarding claims 28 and 33, Grundy DIFFERS in that it does not disclose the dispensing controller is provided with a maximum dispensing time, and the dispensing controller is arranged to stop the dispensing of beverage after expiring of the maximum dispensing time if the beverage level sensor does not provide a level sensor signal indicative of the retail beverage container being sufficiently filled. Attention, however, is directed to the Bertolini reference, which discloses a dispensing controller is provided with a maximum dispensing time, and the dispensing controller is arranged to stop the dispensing of beverage after expiring of the maximum dispensing time if the beverage level sensor does not provide a level sensor signal indicative of the retail beverage container being sufficiently filled (par. 0043).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the Grundy reference in view of the teachings of the Bertolini reference by setting a maximum dispensing time for the purpose of preventing overfilling.
Claim(s) 34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grundy in view of Brown as applied to claim 19 above, and further in view of Griffits et al. (20070191983).
Regarding claim 34, Grundy DIFFERS in that it does not disclose the retail beverage container comprises a glass bottle. Attention, however, is directed to the Griffits reference, which discloses a glass bottle (par. 0008).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the Grundy reference in view of the teachings of the Griffits reference by employing a glass bottle because it is a known suitable container for storing a beverage (par. 0008 of Griffits).
Claim(s) 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grundy in view of Brown as applied to claim 19 above, and further in view of Rutledge (WO2004056695A1).
Regarding claim 35, Grundy DIFFERS in that it does not disclose the beverage comprises beer or cider. Attention, however, is directed to the Rutledge reference, which discloses beer or cider (see abstract).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the Grundy reference in view of the teachings of the Rutledge reference by including beer because it is a popular beverage (page 1, paragraph 2 of Rutledge).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed July 29, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s argument that Browns only teaches a machine-readable optical sensor is not persuasive because one of ordinary skill in art would have understood that optical sensors are not limited to machine-readable applications.
Applicant’s argument that Lyons requires arranging the sensor in the container is not persuasive because Lyons only discloses that the sensor can be arranged in the container (col. 94, lines 17-20).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 DONNELL ALAN LONG whose telephone number is (571)270-5610. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8AM-5PM.
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, PAUL DURAND can be reached at 571-272-4459. 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.
/DONNELL A LONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754
