DOUBLE BLIND WINE TASTING

Application No. 19/232,420

• Filed: Jun 09, 2025
• Priority: Jun 14, 2017 — provisional 62/519,589
  • Mar 14, 2018 — provisional 62/642,849
  • Jun 13, 2018 — continuation of 11/379,864
  • May 31, 2022 — continuation of 17/828,674
  • Jun 17, 2024 — continuation of 18/744,920
• Examiner: EL-HAGE HASSAN, ABDALLAH A
• Assignee: Cliink LLC
• OA Round: 1 (Non-Final)

Office Action

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 .
Status of the Application
This action is a first action on the merits in response to the application filed on 06/09/2025.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-30 filed on 06/09/2025 are currently pending and have been examined in this application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/10/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 3-13, 15, 17-28, and 30 are allowable.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informality: Claim 2 recites “plurality of sleeves is configured to” it should read “plurality of sleeves are configured to”.
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informality: Claim 14 recites “plurality of tracking identifiers is a plurality of wine bottle charms” it should read “plurality of tracking identifiers are a plurality of wine bottle charms”.
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informality: Claim 16 recites “plurality of tracking identifiers is a plurality of metallic wine bottle charms” it should read “plurality of tracking identifiers are a plurality of metallic wine bottle charms”.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 29 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Specifically, claim 29 is directed to an abstract idea without additional elements to integrate the claims into a practical application or to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Claim 29 is directed to a process, machine, or manufacture (Step 1), however the claim is directed to the abstract idea of providing instructions to perform a beverage/wine tasting game.
With respect to Step 2A Prong One of the frameworks, claim 29 recites an abstract idea. Claim 29 includes limitations for “provide a set of instructions comprising a use of the plurality of sleeves, the plurality of tracking identifiers, and the plurality of tracking covers to blind a plurality of distinct beverages,(ii) assign a first one-to-one correspondence between each distinct beverage identity of a plurality of distinct beverage identities and each distinct indicium of the first plurality of distinct indicia, and(iii) assign a second one-to-one correspondence between each distinct indicium of the first plurality of distinct indicia and each distinct indicium of the second plurality of distinct indicia”
The limitations above recite an abstract idea under Step 2A Prong One. More particularly, the limitations above recite Mental Process because an ordinary person can analyze can reasonably provide instruction to perform a beverage tasting game. As a result, claim 29 recites an abstract idea under Step 2A Prong One.
With respect to Step 2A Prong Two of the framework, claim 29 does not include additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Claim 29 includes additional elements that do not recite an abstract idea. The additional elements of claim 29 include “a non-transitory computer readable medium that stores a program, wherein the program causes a computer to:”. When considered in view of the claim as a whole, the recited computer elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because the computer elements are generic computer elements that are merely used as a tool to perform the recited abstract idea. As set forth in the 2019 Eligibility Guidance, 84 Fed. Reg. at 55 “merely include[ing] instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer” is an example of when an abstract idea has not been integrated into a practical application. Therefore, the claim is directed to an abstract idea.
As a result, claim 29 does not include additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application under Step 2A Prong Two.
With respect to Step 2B of the framework, claim 29 does not include additional elements amounting to significantly more than the abstract idea. As noted above, claim 29 includes additional elements that do not recite an abstract idea. The additional elements of claim 29 include “a non-transitory computer readable medium that stores a program, wherein the program causes a computer to:”. The recited computer elements do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea because the computer elements are generic computer elements that are merely used as a tool to perform the recited abstract idea. As a result, claim 29 does not include additional elements that amount to significantly more than the abstract idea under Step 2B.
Therefore, the claim is directed to an abstract idea without additional elements amounting to significantly more than the abstract idea. Accordingly, claim 29 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.

Conclusion
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure Brumfield (US 20120138563 A1). Brumfield teaches personally identifiable closure. The personally identifiable closure includes a substantially circular cover; a skirt region depending from the periphery of the cover and extending to a circumferential flange spaced opposite the cover; and, a region on the cover, skirt, or both the cover and the skirt that is customizable with individual user personal identification indicia. User-selectable indicia include letters, numbers, colors, images or graphics, and logos, which the user can use in order to associate the closure, or cap, with their individual beverage container.
Any inquiry concerning this communication from the examiner should be directed to Abdallah El-Hagehassan whose contact information is [phone] and [e-mail] The examiner can normally be reached on Monday- Friday 8 am to 5 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Rutao Wu can be reached on [phone]. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is [phone].
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the patent application information retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information of published applications may be obtained from either private PAIR or public PAIR. Status information of unpublished applications is available through private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have any questions on access to the private PAIR system, contact the electronic business center (EBC) at [phone] (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO customer service representative or access to the automated information system, call [phone] (in US or Canada) or [phone].
/ABDALLAH A EL-HAGE HASSAN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3623

Prosecution Timeline

• Jun 09, 2025: Application Filed
• Jul 07, 2026: Non-Final Rejection mailed — §101 (current)