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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 1/21/26 has been entered.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 15-17 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
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.
Claims 1-4, 6-11, 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lara et al [US 2019/0150488A1], in view of Mazoyer et al [US 2021/0000896A1], Sun [US 2019/0343158A1], and Seung [KR 20040035327A].
Lara et al teach a method of preparing seaweed extract from Eucheuma seaweed (title) by providing red seaweed such as Eucheuma Cottonii or Spinosum (paragraph 0020), sun-drying the seaweed (paragraph 0020), washing the sun-dried seaweed (paragraph 0021), rehydrating the dried seaweed in a salt solution using potassium chloride at 15-30C (paragraph 0022), separating or removing the rehydrated seaweed from the salt solution after 1-2 hours (paragraph 0022), size reduction of the rehydrated seaweed via chopping (paragraph 0023), further drying the rehydrated seaweed at a temperature not exceeding 105C (paragraph 0026), milling the dried seaweed into a powder (paragraph 0027), a final moisture content of 7-12% (paragraph 0027), grinding to a particle size of 50-150 microns (paragraph 0027), and an absence of alkaline processing (paragraph 0006).
Lara et al do not explicitly recite the salt solution being about 50-75C with a pH of 9.5 or less (claim 1), no bleaching agent (claim 1), the first drying occurring at about 35-120C (claim 4), pressing to obtain a liquid and pomace (claim 8), and using both KCL and NaCl in the solution (claim 19-20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the claimed (b) drying temperature into the invention of Lara et al since Lara et al already included sun drying the seaweed (paragraph 0020) and then further drying the rehydrated seaweed at a temperature not exceeding 105C (paragraph 0026), since Lara et al simply did not mention a temperature range for the initial drying step, since sun drying commonly occurred at temperature such as 35C or 95F, and since the claimed temperature levels would have been used during the course of normal experimentation and optimization procedures due to factors such as the type of seaweed, the desired degree of drying, and/or the size of the seaweed in the method of Lara et al.
Sun teaches a method for making seaweed meal (title) by providing dried seaweed (paragraph 0010), soaking the seaweed in a salt solution at 60-90C (paragraph 0012), and the salt solution using one or more salts such as KCl and NaCl (paragraph 0012).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the claimed salt combination and salt solution temperature into the invention of Lara et al, in view of Sun, since both are directed to methods of making seaweed powder, since Lara et al already included rehydrating the dried seaweed in a salt solution using potassium chloride preferably at 15-30C (paragraph 0022), since seaweed powder was commonly made by using a salt solution at 60-90C (paragraph 0012) and the salt solution using one or more salts such as KCl and NaCl (paragraph 0012) as shown by Sun, since many food products used a combination of KCl and NaCl in order to provide reduced levels of sodium and to mask the flavor of the KCl, since a higher temperature would have also provided a preservative effect by killing harmful microorganisms on the seaweed of Lara et al, and since the claimed temperature levels would have been used during the course of normal experimentation and optimization procedures due to factors such as the type of seaweed, the type of salt used, and/or the desired final properties of the seaweed powder in the method of Lara et al, in view of Sun.
Mazoyer et al teach a method for making seaweed-based powder (title) by providing red seaweed such as Eucheuma cottonii (paragraph 0025-0027), washing the seaweed (paragraph 0084), a post-harvest exuding step which provides a “sauna-like treatment” of at least 95% moisture and a temperature of at least 20C (paragraph 0075, 0093-0094), sun drying the seaweed (paragraph 0076, 0103), soaking the dried seaweed in a brine solution (paragraph 0077), the brine solution being 5-50% salt (paragraph 0104), the solution being at least 85C (paragraph 0105), the salt being potassium chloride with a pH of 6.0-10.0 (paragraph 0108), separating the brine from the seaweed by pressing (paragraph 0109), further drying the soaked seaweed (paragraph 0078), milling the dried seaweed into a powder (paragraph 0079, 0114), not subjecting the seaweed to alkaline treatment (paragraph 0088), a size reduction step (paragraph 0114), a final moisture content of 8-12% (paragraph 0113), the powder having a particle size of D50 at least 125 µm (paragraph 0031), and an absence of bleach, peroxide, chlorite, and/or persulfate compounds (see whole document).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the claimed pH level and pressing into the invention of Lara et al, in view of Mazoyer et al, since both are directed to methods of making seaweed powder, since Lara et al already included a solution of potassium chloride but simply did not mention a pH level, since seaweed powder methods commonly included a solution of potassium chloride at a pH of 6.0-10.0 (paragraph 0108) as shown by Mazoyer et al, and since the claimed pH level would have been used during the course of normal experimentation and optimization procedures due to factors such as the type of seaweed used, the type of salt used, and/or the desired final properties of the seaweed powder in the method of Lara et al, in view of Mazoyer et al; since Lara et al already included separating the seaweed from the brine, since red seaweed processing commonly included separating the brine from the seaweed by pressing (paragraph 0109) as shown by Mazoyer et al, and since pressing would have provided better separation of the seaweed and brine of Lara et al, in view of Mazoyer et al.
Seung teaches a method for preparing clean laver/seaweed (title) by using vinegar and charcoal to both deodorize and sterilize the seaweed (Tech-Solution).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the claimed exclusion of bleaching agents into the invention of Lara et al, in view of Seung, since both are directed to methods of preparing seaweed products, since Lara et al already included a step for deodorizing and sterilizing the seaweed with a bleaching agent (paragraph 0024), since seaweed was also commonly sterilized and deodorized by other means such as the vinegar and charcoal method of Seung as described above, since many consumers did not want bleaching agents in their foods, and since the substitution of one known deodorizing and sterilizing method step (ie charcoal and vinegar) for another (ie bleach agent) would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lara et al, in view of Sun et al, Seung, and Mazoyer et al, as applied above, and further in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art [page 4-5; “Ali et al (2017)”].
Lara et al, Sun et al, Seung, and Mazoyer et al teach the above mentioned concepts. Lara et al do not explicitly recite post-harvest sauna treatment to remove color or odor (claim 12). Mazoyer et al teach a post-harvest exuding step which provides a “sauna-like treatment” of at least 95% moisture and a temperature of at least 20C (paragraph 0075, 0093-0094). AAPA also disclosed post-harvest treatment of red seaweed by “Ali et al (2017)” which included sauna-like treatment to remove color (page 4-5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the claimed sauna treatment into the invention of Lara et al, in view of AAPA and Mazoyer et al, since all are directed to methods of treating seaweed, since red seaweed processes commonly included a sauna treatment as shown by Mazoyer et al, since sauna treatments were commonly known to provide color removal as shown by AAPA (Ali et al (2017)), and since removal of color would have made the powder of Lara et al easier to incorporate into other food products.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lara et al, in view of Sun et al, Seung, and Mazoyer et al, as applied above, and further in view of Kim [KR 910005269B1].
Lara et al, Seung, Sun et al and Mazoyer et al teach the above mentioned concepts. Lara et al do not explicitly recite salting the harvested seaweed (claim 18). Kim teaches a method for processing seaweed by initially salting the seaweed before washing it (page 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the claimed salting into the invention of Lara et al, in view of Kim, since both are directed to methods of processing seaweed, since Lara et al already included steps of drying and washing the seaweed (paragraph 0020-0021), since seaweed was commonly salted before washing as shown by Kim above, since many foods, such as hams, were commonly salted prior to storage, and since a salting step would have aided the drying step of Lara et al, in view of Kim.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/21/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Lara et al included a bleaching agent. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the claimed exclusion of bleaching agents into the invention of Lara et al, in view of Seung, since both are directed to methods of preparing seaweed products, since Lara et al already included a step for deodorizing and sterilizing the seaweed with a bleaching agent (paragraph 0024), since seaweed was also commonly sterilized and deodorized by other means such as the vinegar and charcoal method of Seung as described above, since many consumers did not want bleaching agents in their foods, and since the substitution of one known deodorizing and sterilizing method step (ie charcoal and vinegar) for another (ie bleach agent) would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DREW E BECKER whose telephone number is (571)272-1396. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-5pm Monday-Friday.
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, Erik Kashnikow can be reached at 571-270-3475. 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.
/DREW E BECKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1792