Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/075,905

BEVERAGE DISPENSING MACHINE

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Mar 11, 2025
Examiner
MAUST, TIMOTHY LEWIS
Art Unit
3753
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Ipeco Holdings Limited
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allow Rate
1169 granted / 1430 resolved
+11.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
1463
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
38.0%
-2.0% vs TC avg
§102
34.7%
-5.3% vs TC avg
§112
19.6%
-20.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1430 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 . 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 26 – 39 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. Claim 1 recites the limitation "the vessel" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. 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)(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. Claim(s) 26, 27 and 29 - 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hannah et al. (8061263). Regarding claim 26, the Hannah et al. reference discloses a beverage dispensing machine (Figure 2) for dispensing a beverage, wherein the beverage dispensing machine, comprises: - an upper engaging member (100) movable to a deployed position for engaging an upper portion of the vessel; - a dispensing nozzle (inherent) for dispensing the beverage; and - a sensor (102, 104, 106) for detecting when the beverage is at a predetermined level in a vessel; and - wherein the sensor comprises first and second annular electrodes (106a, b; i.e., level sensors) disposed on the upper engaging member, the first and second annular electrodes being arranged concentrically. Being disposed on the annular sensor, electrodes (106a, b) can be construed as annular. See Figure 5. Regarding claim 27, wherein the first and second annular electrodes (106a, b) are formed around the dispensing nozzle. See Figure 5. Regarding claim 29, wherein the first and second annular electrodes (106a, b) are arranged concentrically about a vertical axis. Electrodes (106a, b) have the same center and vertical axis. Regarding claim 30, wherein the vertical axis is arranged at least substantially coincident with a vertical centreline of the vessel. See Figure 2. Regarding claim 31, comprising: an actuating mechanism (120) for deploying the upper engaging member (100). Regarding claim 32, wherein the dispensing nozzle is suitable for dispensing the beverage through an aperture formed in the vessel; wherein, when deployed, the upper engaging member (100) is configured at least partially to close the aperture. The aperture opening is controlled by a solenoid valve. See col. 5, lines 23 – 24. Regarding claim 33, wherein the upper engaging member (100) comprises at least one fluid seal (ring 104 acts as a seal) for cooperating with the vessel (10) at least substantially to seal the aperture. Regarding claim 34, wherein the dispensing nozzle is disposed in the upper engaging member (100); and the at least one fluid seal (ring 104) extends around the dispensing nozzle. Regarding claim 35, wherein the or each fluid seal (104) comprises an annular seal. 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) 38 and 39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hannah et al. in view of Nordskog (4949627). Regarding claims 38 and 39, the Hannah et al. reference discloses the invention (discussed supra), but doesn’t disclose a housing for removably mounting the beverage dispensing machine in a gallery of a vehicle. The Nordskog reference discloses another beverage dispensing machine (i.e., coffee maker) for use in an aircraft galley. Nordskog further discloses a housing (32, 34) to fit in a standard coffee maker bay of an aircraft (col. 6, lines 9 – 19). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the Hannah et al. device to have a housing mountable in a gallery of an aircraft (i.e., vehicle) as, for example, taught by the Nordskog reference since it is well known in the art, conventional and would be obvious to try without unexpected results. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 28, 36 and 37 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: None of the art of record, alone or in combination, teach: Regarding claim 28, wherein the first annular electrode is disposed within the second annular electrode. Regarding claim 36, wherein the upper engaging member comprises a plurality of the fluid seals, the fluid seals having different sizes and/or profiles for cooperating with a plurality of vessels having apertures of different sizes and/or profiles. Regarding claim 37, wherein each fluid seal comprises an annular seal; and wherein the fluid seals are arranged concentrically. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The Shao (CN 1588709) and Murakami (JP 24102997) references disclose beverage apparatus having concentrically arranged annular electrodes. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY LEWIS MAUST whose telephone number is (571)272-4891. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 7am - 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, Craig Schneider can be reached at 571-272-3607. 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 L MAUST/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 11, 2025
Application Filed
Mar 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595164
Methods and Apparatus for Dispensing at Multiple Dispensing Points
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583418
Filling Device for a Vehicle, and Vehicle Having Such a Filling Device
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583730
Automated Beverage Dispensing System and Method
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583725
LIQUID FILLING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577034
AEROSOL SAFETY ACTUATOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
82%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+10.0%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1430 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month