• All Courts
  • Federal Courts
  • Bankruptcies
  • PTAB
  • ITC
Track Search
Export
Download All
Active Filters1
14 results

PORTION CAPSULE HAVING AN IDENTIFIER

Docket 17/385,109, U.S. Patent Application (July 26, 2021)
Art Group3761
Case TypeUtility - 099/295000
Class099
Patent
11230430
Marc KRÜGER
Applicant K-FEE SYSTEM GMBH
Assignee K-FEE SYSTEM GMBH
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

Trial Termination or Final Written Decision

Document PORTION CAPSULE HAVING AN IDENTIFIER, 17/385,109, No. M0WLIHLWWFYBX50 (U.S. Pat. App. Sep. 10, 2024)
Dec. 8 (adopting Patent Owner’s own proposeddefinition of one of ordinary skill in the art); see Sur-reply 3-4 (citing Ex. 1066, 34:16—35:9; Ex. 1067, 101:3— 12, 102:20—104:9; Ex. 2017 44 3-4, 8-10) (failing to establish adequately, if at all, how Dr. Howle’s qualifications include the requisite minimum five- year period of relevant design experience).
Patent 11,230,430 B2 “To satisfy the written description requirement the disclosure of the prior application must ‘convey with reasonable clarity to those skilled in the art that, as of the filing date sought, the inventor was in possession of the invention.” PowerQasis, 522 F.3d at 1306 (quoting Vas-Cath Inc. v. Mahurkar, 935 F.2d 1555, 1563-64 (Fed. Cir. 1991)) (internal marks omitted).
But Patent Owner and Dr. Howell do not explain how a barcode could be used in the devices depicted in Figures 16-18, which place the detection means 2.4.2 on the outer circumference of the flange (notits underside) and rely on toothed-rings physically interacting with either the chamber, retaining arms, or a pinion.
Petitioner further contends that one of ordinary skill in the art would have implemented the capsule recognition process of Rossi in the device of Yoakim and Jarisch in order to both increase safety and provide improved accuracy of brewing conditions.
Petitioner contends one of ordinary skill in the art would have incorporated the machineactivation ') Petitioner’s arguments on this issue fairly respond to assertions, advanced in Patent Owner’s Response, that Yoakim doesnot suggest a capsule free of a filter.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

Request for Trial Granted

Document PORTION CAPSULE HAVING AN IDENTIFIER, 17/385,109, No. LMHWS0WHGREENX0 (U.S. Pat. App. Sep. 13, 2023)
Patent Ownerasserts that Petitioner argued successfully before the district court that the term “barcode” means a “machine readable code consisting ofparallel bars of different widths that encode more than only two unique binary characters suchas 0 or 1.” Prelim. Resp. 17 (citing Ex. 1052, 7,9-12).
Petitioner further contendsthat one of ordinary skill in the art would have implemented the capsule recognition process ofRossi in the device of Yoakim and Jarisch in order to both increase safety and provide improved accuracy ofbrewing conditions.
First, according to Patent Owner, “the Petition addresses only the plain and ordinary meaning of ‘barcode,’”’ and fails to demonstrate that Yoakim’s “barcode”satisfies the construction adopted by the district court, 1.e., a series ofparallel bars of different widths that encode more than only two unique binary characters
Patent 11,230,430 B2 Mr. Jobin testifies that because Jarisch expressly discloses how to modify a centrifugal brewing chamberto read a code on the bottom side of the capsule flange, one ofordinary skill in the art would not perceive any difficulty in combining the identified disclosures of Yoakim andJarisch.
On this record, Petitioner provides a reasoned argument, supported by specific citations to Castellani, to explain why one of ordinary skill in the art wouldhaveseen a benefit to using Castellant’s ejection forks and capsule removal mechanism in the combined system.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

1-2-US-173851090XP1

Document PORTION CAPSULE HAVING AN IDENTIFIER, 17/385,109, No. 1-2-US-173851090XP1 (U.S. Pat. App. Mar. 8, 2022)
11,230,430 Patent Number: January 25, 2022 Issued: Name of Patentee: Marc Kruger Title of Invention:
Attached is PTO/SB/44 (also Form PTO-1050) in a form suitable for printing.
The exact page and line number where the errors are showncorrectly in the applicationfile are: IDS filed 7/28/21, page 4, cite 4. reads “2001/0181005 A1 08/09/2007Kirschner etal.” and is erroneously not printed on the patent.
Amendmentto the Claims Filed 11/12/21 Claim 24, lines 1-2 read “wherein the a side wall’, whereas the granted patent, column 13, lines 38-39 erroneously read “wherein the side wall” Claim 26, line 29 reads “group of single-serve capsules”, where as the granted patent, column 14, line 36 erroneously reads “group of single serve capsules” Claim 29, line 2 reads “configured to rad read the”, whereas the granted patent, column 14, lines 44 and 45 erroneously read “configured to rad the” 3.
Please send the Certificate to: Name: Address: Paul J. Palinski The Dobrusin Law Firm, P.C. 29 W. LawrenceStreet, Suite 210 Pontiac, Ml 48342 Respectfully submitted, Dated: 3/8/22 /Paul J. Palinski/
cite Cite Document
Analyze

3-2-US-173851090XP1

Document PORTION CAPSULE HAVING AN IDENTIFIER, 17/385,109, No. 3-2-US-173851090XP1 (U.S. Pat. App. Mar. 8, 2022)

cite Cite Document
Analyze

L0IH09VCLDFLYX5

Document PORTION CAPSULE HAVING AN IDENTIFIER, 17/385,109, No. L0IH09VCLDFLYX5 (U.S. Pat. App. Mar. 8, 2022)

cite Cite Document
Analyze

L0IH09VBLDFLYX5

Document PORTION CAPSULE HAVING AN IDENTIFIER, 17/385,109, No. L0IH09VBLDFLYX5 (U.S. Pat. App. Mar. 8, 2022)

cite Cite Document
Analyze

1-1-US-173851090WP1

Document PORTION CAPSULE HAVING AN IDENTIFIER, 17/385,109, No. 1-1-US-173851090WP1 (U.S. Pat. App. Jan. 26, 2022)

cite Cite Document
Analyze
1 2 >>