Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/616,220

COCOA EXTRACTION METHODS AND TECHNIQUES

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Dec 03, 2021
Examiner
ZILBERING, ASSAF
Art Unit
1792
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Odc Lizenz AG
OA Round
4 (Non-Final)
33%
Grant Probability
At Risk
4-5
OA Rounds
4y 9m
To Grant
60%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 33% of cases
33%
Career Allow Rate
206 granted / 619 resolved
-31.7% vs TC avg
Strong +27% interview lift
Without
With
+27.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 9m
Avg Prosecution
81 currently pending
Career history
700
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.5%
-38.5% vs TC avg
§103
57.9%
+17.9% vs TC avg
§102
10.2%
-29.8% vs TC avg
§112
26.0%
-14.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 619 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . DETAILED ACTION Status of Claims Note: The amendment of December 19th 2025 has been considered. Claims 1-20 are pending in the current application. Claims 1-12 and 14-20 are withdrawn from consideration. Claim 13 is examined in the current application. Any rejections not recited below have been withdrawn. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The text of those sections of Title 35 of the U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hühn (EP 3114942 B1) in view of Hammerstone Jr. et al., (US 6,627,232). Regarding claim 13: Hühn discloses cocoa beans extracts with high content of polyphenols, antioxidants, vitamins and/or sugars, wherein the nibs are not fermented or pre-dried prior to extraction (see Hühn paragraphs [0001] and [0012]-[0014]). Furthermore, Hühn discloses the extraction process temperature is below 70°C and comprises first forming a suspension of cocoa nibs in an aqueous ethanol solution (i.e., a mixture of a first extraction agent, water and ethanol) comprising 1-90wt% ethanol, followed by wet grinding and separating the ground suspension into three phases, water, fat (i.e., cocoa butter) and solids, followed by further processing the phases to attain cocoa butter, cocoa powder, polyphenolic powder and cocoa aroma extracts (see Hühn paragraphs [0012]-[0014], [0029], [0033] and [0043]-[0044]), but fails to disclose an organic solvent; However, Hammerstone discloses extracting cocoa butter, aroma and other compounds from cocoa nibs using a 50:50 mixture of water and acetone as such mixture provides better separation than provided by a water and ethanol solution (see Hammerstone abstract; from column 3, line 43 to column 5, line 39). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a skilled artisan at the time the application was filed to have modified Hühn and to have used a 50:50 water:acetone extraction solution to attain improved separation, and thus arrive at the claimed limitations. In the alternative, even though Hühn in view of Hammerstone may fail to disclose every step of the claimed process of extracting the cocoa nibs, it is noted that the recited cocoa nibs extract product is limited and defined by process limitations, as such, the patentability of the coca beans extract product and not the recited process steps of claim 13 must be established. As set forth in MPEP §2113, “even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). In this case, Hühn discloses cocoa beans extracts with high content of polyphenols, antioxidants, vitamins and/or sugars, wherein such productions are known to involve extraction methods using low temperature processes and solvents, the cocoa beans extracts in Hühn in view of Hammerstone reasonably appears to be either identical or similar to the cocoa beans extracts recited in the claims, and thus Hühn in view of Hammerstone meets the claim limitations. Otherwise, any slight differences in the composition as a result of the recited process steps would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art and well within the ordinary level of skill to have produced. Modifications to a well-established process that are minor is considered well within the realm of ordinary skill. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see “Remarks”, filed on December 19th 2025, with respect to the rejection of claim 13 under 35 USC §103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Hühn as modified by Hammerstone Jr. et al., (see discussion, above). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ASSAF ZILBERING whose telephone number is (571)270-3029. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:30-5:00. 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 on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /ASSAF ZILBERING/Examiner, Art Unit 1792
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 03, 2021
Application Filed
Jul 08, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 28, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 26, 2024
Response Filed
Apr 22, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Jul 25, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 28, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Sep 02, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 28, 2025
Interview Requested
Dec 19, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599143
EMULSIFIED OIL AND FAT COMPOSITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12588688
METHOD FOR PRODUCING AN INGREDIENT COMPRISING A COMBINATION OF AT LEAST THREE MILK PROTEINS AND USE OF THE INGREDIENT OBTAINED
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582135
DHA Enriched Polyunsaturated Fatty Acid Compositions
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577593
DHA ENRICHED POLYUNSATURATED FATTY ACID COMPOSITIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12564198
METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING SN-2 PALMITIC TRIACYLGLYCEROLS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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

4-5
Expected OA Rounds
33%
Grant Probability
60%
With Interview (+27.2%)
4y 9m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 619 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