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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 2/2/26 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 12-15, 18-19, 21-22 and 24-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Haschen (20050255220).
Haschen teaches a process of making a protein-containing feedstuff, said process comprising:
(i) mixing (par. 0031) (a) at least one protein feed material (par. 0031; corn distillers grain; CP) with (b) added methionine (par. 0032 soybean meal comprising methionine table 1), to obtain a mixture (par. 0031-0032, par. 0058) and
(ii) (ii) drying said mixture (par. 0059), to obtain said protein-containing feedstuff (par. 0035, 0069), wherein:
the protein-containing feedstuff comprises the added methionine (relative obtained mixture) in an amount of not less than 1 gram of methionine per 100 grams of protein in the protein feed material (table 1; 30.3% protein of 52% of mixture corn distillers grain: 52x.303= 15.6% of mixture protein of distiller grain; soybean meal comprises .83% methionine thus relative soybean meal being 48% of the mixture, par. 0031, 48 x .0083= .398 of mixture added methionine; .398 methionine added per 15.6% protein of distillers grain= .398/15.6=.0255 x 100=2.55; alternatively 100/15.6=6.41; .398x6.41=2.55) and
the protein-containing feedstuff comprises at least 20 wt. % protein on a dry matter basis (table 1 distiller grain 30.3% protein).
said at least one protein feed material comprises at least one material selected from the group consisting of distillers grains (par. 0031 corn distillers grain), and
wherein said added methionine (par. 0032 soybean meal comprising methionine table 1) does not include any methionine which is naturally occurring in the protein of said protein feed material (table 1; methionine of soybean meal not corn distillers grain, i.e. added to a) protein feed material).
Claim 13, said drying is conducted with heating (par. 0059).
Claim 14, said protein-containing feedstuff has a moisture content between 0 and 20 wt. %, based on the total weight of said protein- containing feedstuff (par. 0061; DM after processing).
Claim 15, wherein said (a) protein feed material and said (b) added methionine are mixed in relative amounts such that a ratio of methionine to protein in said protein feed material is 2 to 10 grams of methionine to 100 grams of protein in said protein feed material (table 1; 30.3% protein of 52% of mixture corn distillers grain: 52x.303= 15.6% of mixture protein of distiller grain; soybean meal comprises .83% methionine thus relative soybean meal being 48% of the mixture, par. 0031, 48 x .0083= .398 of mixture added methionine; .398 methionine added per 15.6% protein of distillers grain= .398/15.6=.0255 x 100=2.55; alternatively 100/15.6=6.41; .398x6.41=2.55).
Claim 18, said at least one protein feed material comprises corn distillers grains (par. 0031).
Claim 19, wherein said at least one protein feed material comprises corn distillers grains plus solubles (par. 0031).
Claim 21, said protein feed material has a moisture content between 10 and 90 wt. %, based on the total weight of said protein feed material (table 1; par. 0061).
Claim 22, said drying comprises exposing said mixture to an atmosphere having a temperature of 80C (176F) to 600°C (par. 0059).
Claim 24, said drying comprises exposing said mixture to an atmosphere having a temperature of 80 (176F) to 250°C (par. 0059).
Claim 25, said drying comprises exposing said mixture to an atmosphere having a temperature of 80C (176F) to 150°C (par. 0059).
Claim 26, said drying comprises exposing said mixture to an atmosphere having a temperature of 150C (302F) to 250°C (482F) (table 17).
Claim 27, said protein-containing feedstuff has a moisture content of 0 to 19 wt. %, based on the total weight of said protein- containing feedstuff (par. 0061).
Claim 28, a protein-containing feedstuff, which is prepared by a process according to claim 12 (par. 0031).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 of this title, 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 17 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haschen (20050255220) in view of Miller et al. (20110236559).
Haschen is taken as above.
Haschen teaches distillers grains for the production of feed, including corn distillers grains and thus one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to look to the art of corn distiller grains for feed as taught by Miller.
Miller further the distillers grain obtained as ethanol by-products employing a starting starch bearing grain including corn (par. 0016).
Thus since Haschen teaches the protein feed material selected from the group consisting of distillers grains, since both teach corn distillers grain, though Haschen is silent to the origin of the corn distillers grains. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to teach the corn distillers grains of Haschen obtained from known grain production by-products such as resulting from industrial production of ethanol as taught by Miller (par. 0016) for its art recognized purpose of obtaining a same distiller grain for producing animal feed as desired by Haschen and since the distillers grains would need to be produced due to processing.
With respect to claim 23, Haschen teaches drying in an atmosphere having a temperature of 80 to 600C (par. 0059). Though silent to a time of drying, importantly Haschen teaches drying to achieve a specific end moisture content, i.e. the constant. Thus since product exposure time depends on the efficiency of applying the heat to the product as taught by Haschen (par. 0059 last 3 lines) and the size and scale of the processing operation (par. 0059) relative an undefined amount.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to teach a drying time of 1-60 minutes relative drying temperature for its art recognized purpose of achieving a final moisture content which prevents spoilage during shipment and storage as taught by Haschen (par. 0061) and since one of skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success that through routine experimentation teach a desired drying time relative same temperatures as taught to achieve the constant, i.e. final moisture content.
Response to Arguments
It is initially noted claim 12 provides for the option of protein feed material consisting of distillers grain as taught by Haschen (par. 0031 corn distillers grain).
With respect to applicants urging directed to added methionine, it is noted the claimed added methionine is not limited by type or source, merely added in addition to a) the protein feed material.
Thus with respect to applicants urging said added methionine does not include any methionine which is naturally occurring in the protein of said protein feed material, importantly the added methionine is not included in said protein feed material, i.e. a)
Haschen teaches the addition b) to a). Thus the added methionine of the soybean meal is distinct from the protein feed material. Applicants claimed added methionine is specifically limited by not of the protein feed material, i.e. a). In the instant case, said added methionine (par. 0032 soybean meal comprising methionine table 1) does not include any methionine which is naturally occurring in the protein of said protein feed material (table 1; methionine of soybean meal not corn distillers grain, i.e. added to a) protein feed material).
In addition it is noted though applicant urges protein feed materials are excluded from the “added methionine”. Importantly the claim is not limited by the “added methionine” source but merely added in addition to a). Haschen teaches the addition as a component of soybean meal. Applicants urgings are specific to the protein feed material, which in the instant case Haschen teaches corn distillers grain (par. 0031; table). Thus Haschen teaches applicants mixture of (a) and (b). Claim 12 provides for the option of an additional feed product which in the instant case the rejection does not rely on the optional 3rd component.
With respect to applicants urging directed to the amount of methionine added. As noted by applicant the added amount of methionine is relative the protein content of the protein feed material, in the instant case the distillers grain. Thus with respect to the added amount of methionine contributed to the mixture, where the mixture is 52%;48% (par. 0031). 30.3% protein of 52% of mixture corn distillers grain: 52x.303= 15.6% of mixture protein of distiller grain; soybean meal comprises .83% methionine thus relative soybean meal being 48% of the mixture, par. 0031, 48 x .0083= .398 of mixture added methionine; .398 methionine added per 15.6% protein of distillers grain= .398/15.6=.0255 x 100=2.55; alternatively 100/15.6=6.41; .398x6.41=2.55
With respect to applicants urging directed to Miller, Miller is relied upon to teach known production methods which produce corn distillers grain.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Steven Leff whose telephone number is (571) 272-6527. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 8:30 - 5:00.
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 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.
/STEVEN N LEFF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1792