Markus Anliker

Patent Trials and Appeals Board

Jan 27, 2020

12738052 - (D) (P.T.A.B. Jan. 27, 2020)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www.uspto.gov
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
12/738,052 05/13/2010 Markus Anliker Q118513 8799
23373 7590 01/27/2020
SUGHRUE MION, PLLC
2000 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, N.W.
SUITE 900
WASHINGTON, DC 20006
EXAMINER
DUNIVER, DIALLO IGWE
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3761
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
01/27/2020 ELECTRONIC
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
following e-mail address(es):
PPROCESSING@SUGHRUE.COM
USPTO@sughrue.com
sughrue@sughrue.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________________

BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
____________________

Ex parte MARKUS ANLIKER
__________________

Appeal 2018-005392
Application 12/738,052
Technology Center 3700
____________________

Before EDWARD A. BROWN, JAMES P. CALVE, and JILL D. HILL,
Administrative Patent Judges.

CALVE, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL

STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 134(a), Appellant1 appeals from the decision
of the Examiner to reject claims 1–3, 5–13, 18–21, and 25–27. Appeal Br.
12. Claims 4, 14–17, and 22–24 are cancelled. Id. at 30–34 (Claims App.).
We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). Appellant’s representative
appeared at an oral hearing conducted on January 7, 2020.
We REVERSE.

1 “Appellant” refers to “applicant” as defined in 37 C.F.R. § 1.42. Appellant
identifies Rancilio Group S.P.A. as the real party in interest. Appeal Br. 2.
Appeal 2018-005392
Application 12/738,052

2
CLAIMED SUBJECT MATTER
Claims 1 and 13 are independent. Claim 1 is reproduced below.
1. A coffee machine for preparation of an espresso,
the coffee machine comprising:
a button that when pressed triggers automatic preparation
by the machine of the espresso;
a housing with a first set of components arranged therein
for the preparation and dispensing of coffee in a container and a
second set of components for the supply of at least hot water
and steam, wherein:
the housing is subdivided by a partition into two
compartments, a first compartment that is a front compartment
positioned to face the container to receive coffee for
consumption and containing the first set of components, said
first set of components comprising a powder preparation
component, at least one brewing group and a dispensing
component for dispensing the espresso, and a second
compartment that is a rear compartment containing a carrier
element, the carrier element containing the second set of
components for the supply of at least hot water and steam to the
components for dispensing the coffee contained in the first
compartment,
said second set of components comprising a water line
for supplying water, a pump and a first boiler and a second
boiler, the first boiler configured for the supply of hot water
under pressure to the dispensing component for espresso
preparation and the second boiler configured for the supply of
steam under pressure to the dispensing component for espresso
preparation;
wherein the carrier element is slidably removable from
corresponding electrical and water connections within the
second compartment as a module, together with the first boiler
and the second boiler and the pump; and
wherein the pump feeds both the first boiler for the
supply of hot water and the second boiler for the supply of
steam under pressure to the at least one brewing group and the
espresso is dispensed by the dispensing component for espresso
preparation.
Appeal 2018-005392
Application 12/738,052

3
REJECTIONS
Claims 1–3, 7–13, 18–21, and 25–27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as unpatentable over Zanin (US 5,813,318, iss. Sept. 29, 1998), In-
Albon (US 5,957,033, iss. Sept. 28, 1999) (hereinafter “Albon”)2, and Karg
(US 6,101,923, iss. Aug. 15, 2000).3
Claims 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable
over Zanin, Albon, Karg, and Lüssi (US 5,367,947, iss. Nov. 29, 1994).
ANALYSIS
Claims 1–3, 7–13, 18–21, and 25–27
Rejected over Zanin, Albon, and Karg
Regarding claims 1 and 13, the Examiner finds that Zanin teaches a
coffee machine having a housing (frame 13) divided by a partition wall into
a first compartment containing a first set of components for preparing and
dispensing espresso (injection groups 40, 41) and a second compartment
containing a second set of components for supplying hot water and steam.
Final Act. 2–3, 8–9. In particular, the Examiner finds that the first set of
components 40, 41 includes a powder preparation component (strainer 58),
at least one brewing group (injection groups 40, 41), and a dispensing
component for dispensing espresso (spigots 44, 45), and the second set of
components comprises a first boiler (single heating unit 25 with double-
boiler cartridges 27, 28) and a second boiler (central heating unit 20). Id.
The Examiner relies on Albon to teach a slidable carrier element and Karg to
teach a pump that feeds both a first and second boiler. Id. at 3–5, 10–11.

2 The parties refer to this reference as “Albon.” Final Act. 2; Appeal Br. 14.
3 We consider the inclusion of claim 16 and omission of claims 25–27 in the
caption of this rejection as typographical errors where claim 16 is cancelled,
and the rejection includes findings for claims 25–27. Final Act. 2, 12–14.
Appeal 2018-005392
Application 12/738,052

4
Appellant argues that Zanin does not teach a first compartment
containing a first set of components comprising a powder preparation
component, at least one brewing group, and a dispensing component for
dispensing espresso as recited in claims 1 and 13. Appeal Br. 16–18.
Appellant argues that the Specification describes the first compartment as
structure that encloses a space and contains or comprises the first set of
components whereas Zanin has a single housing 13, and the Examiner
identifies an open space outside of housing 13 as containing a first set of
components, namely, injection groups 40, 41, spigots 44, 45, and strainer 58.
Reply Br. 7–10; see Appeal Br. 16–18. Appellant argues that the powder
preparation component grinds coffee beans to create coffee powder. Appeal
Br. 16–18; Reply Br. 5–6 (citing Spec. ¶¶ 2, 10). Appellant also argues that
the Examiner’s treatment of Zanin’s strainer 58 as the claimed “powder
preparation component” is unsupported because “[a] strainer in no way
prepares or makes powder.” Reply Br. 10.
Resolution of this dispute turns on the interpretation of “first
compartment,” “housing,” and “powder preparation component.”
During examination, the PTO gives claims their broadest reasonable
interpretation consistent with the specification and express claim language as
interpreted by a skilled artisan. In re Suitco Surface, Inc., 603 F.3d 1255,
1259–60 (Fed. Cir. 2010); see In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054 (Fed. Cir.
1997) (“the PTO applies to the verbiage of the proposed claims the broadest
reasonable meaning of the words in their ordinary usage as they would be
understood by one of ordinary skill in the art, taking into account whatever
enlightenment by way of definitions or otherwise that may be afforded by
the written description contained in the applicant’s specification.”).
Appeal 2018-005392
Application 12/738,052

5
“Under a broadest reasonable interpretation, words of the claim must
be given their plain meaning, unless such meaning is inconsistent with the
specification and prosecution history.” Trivascular, Inc. v. Samuels, 812
F.3d 1056, 1062 (2016) (citing Suitco Surface, 603 F.3d at 1260) (“While
the broadest reasonable interpretation standard is broad, it does not give the
Board an unfettered license to interpret the words in a claim without regard
for the full claim language and the written description.”). “[U]se of the
words in the context of the written description and customarily by those of
skill in the relevant art that accurately reflects both the ‘ordinary’ and
‘customary’ meaning of the terms in the claims.” Id. (citation omitted).
We interpret “housing” as “a case or enclosure (as for a mechanical
part or an instrument).” Merriam-Webster.com at “http://www.merriam-
webster.com/ dictionary/housing” (accessed Dec. 18, 2019). We interpret
“compartment” as “a separate division or section” or “one of the parts into
which an enclosed space is divided.” Merriam-Webster.com at “http://www.
merriam-webster.com/dictionary/compartment” (accessed Dec. 18, 2019).
These meanings are consistent with the limitations “a housing with a
first set of components arranged therein for the preparation and dispensing
of coffee in a container” “the housing is subdivided by a partition into . . . a
first compartment . . . containing the first set of components” and a second
compartment containing other elements in claim 1. Claim 13 also recites “a
housing comprising at least a first compartment and a second compartment,
the first compartment separated from the second compartment by a partition
wall,” “the first compartment comprising a first set of components, including
a powder preparation component” and the second compartment comprises
other elements. Appeal Br. 29, 32–33 (Claims App.).
Appeal 2018-005392
Application 12/738,052

6
Thus, claims 1 and 13 use “housing” to mean a case or enclosure for a
first set and a second set of components also contained in a first or a second
compartment of the housing. The claims use “compartment” to mean a
separate division or section into which the space enclosed by the housing is
divided by a partition wall. The compartments contain sets of components.
These ordinary meanings also are consistent with the Specification,
which describes housing 1 as including front face 2, side walls 3, back wall
4, bottom 5, and an upper covering (not shown) that encloses a space that is
divided into a front compartment 8 and rear compartment 9 by partition 6.
Spec. ¶ 10. Front compartment 8 contains components for preparing and
pouring the coffee to include a powder preparation component, brewing
groups, and drive and control means. Id. Rear compartment 9 contains the
components for the hot water supply and the steam supply arranged therein.
Id. Figures 1 and 2, reproduced below, show Appellant’s coffee machine.

Figures 1 and 2 above illustrate housing 1 divided into front 8 and rear
compartment 9 by partition 6. Spec. ¶¶ 10, 11. Rear compartment 9
contains slidable carrier 7 with boilers 11, 12. Id. The coffee preparation
components contained in front compartment 8 are not shown. Id. ¶ 10.
Appeal 2018-005392
Application 12/738,052

7
In contrast to the claimed housing and its front compartment, Zanin
discloses a coffee maker with a single housing (casing 14) without separate
compartments as illustrated in Figures 1 and 3, which are reproduced below.

Figure 1 above shows machine 1, case 14, and front portion 11 with
coffee preparation posts 2, 3, 4 and injection groups 5, 6, 7 outside of those
elements. Zanin, 3:25–39. Figure 3 above shows injection group 5, 6, 7 and
double spigot 44, 45 unenclosed below front portion 11. Id. at 4:5–45.
Case 14 forms a housing that contains heating unit 20 and cartridges
27, 28. Id. at 3:40–65. The elements cited by the Examiner as a first set of
coffee preparation components, i.e., strainer 58, brewing groups 40, 41, and
dispensing component 44, 45 (Final Act. 3), are arranged outside of case 14.
They are not contained in case 14 or a front compartment as claimed.
Front portion 11 does not form a front compartment that encloses any
coffee preparation components. Instead, coffee preparation posts 2, 3, 4 and
injection groups 5, 6, 7 are arranged outside of case 14 and front portion 11
as individual units. Zanin, 4:7–25, 5:4–9. Cup-shaped coffee strainer 58 is
located outside case 14 at each post 2, 3, 4 to contain lightly packed ground
coffee. Id. at 4:46–48. Hot water from injection element 60 passes through
the coffee contained in strainer 58. Id. at 4:42–5:30.
Appeal 2018-005392
Application 12/738,052

8
Figures 4 and 5 of Zanin are reproduced below to illustrate strainer 58
at a coffee preparation post 5, 6, 7.

Figures 4 and 5 above illustrate an injection group with handle 57,
strainer 58, cup holder 55, injection element 60, and sprayer 51. Id. at 5:4–
67. Strainer 58 holds ground coffee. Id. at 4:46–52. Strainer 58 is not used
to grind coffee beans. Thus, it is not a “powder preparation component,”
which the Specification describes as a device that grinds coffee into powder.
See Spec. ¶¶ 2, 10. The Examiner’s reliance on Albon to teach a slidable
carrier and Karg to teach a pump does not remedy these deficiencies.
For the foregoing reasons, we do not sustain the rejection of claims 1
and 13 or their respective dependent claims 2, 3, 7–12, 18–21, and 25–27.
Claims 5 and 6
Rejected over Zanin, Albon, Karg, and Lüssi
The Examiner’s reliance on Lüssi to teach features of claims 5 and 6
does not remedy the deficiencies of Zanin, Albon, and Karg discussed above
as to claim 1 from which claims 5 and 6 depend indirectly.

Appeal 2018-005392
Application 12/738,052

9
CONCLUSION
Claims
Rejected
35 U.S.C. § Reference/Basis Affirmed Reversed
1–3, 7–13,
18–21, 25–
27
103(a) Zanin, Albon,
Karg
1–3, 7–13,
18–21, 25–
27
5, 6 103(a) Zanin, Albon,
Karg, Lüssi
5, 6
Overall
Outcome
1–3, 5–13,
18–21, 25–
27

REVERSED