DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 January 7, 2026 has been entered.
Claims 1, 5, 9, 11, 13-15 are pending. Claims 1, 5, 9, 11, 13-15 herein acted on the merits.
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 .
Priority
This application filed 08/05/2022 is a 371 of PCT/KR2020/011962 filed on 09/04/2020 which claims foreign priority to KOREA, REPUBLIC OF 10-2019-0125775 filed on 10/11/2019.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) filed on 11/18/25 and 12/19/25, is in compliance with the provisions of S7 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS is being considered by the Examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments over the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph rejection is persuasive in view of amendments made to the claims. The rejection is withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments over the 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejection of claims 1, 4-5, 9, 11, 13-15 Angelova et al. (Liquid Crystalline Nanostructures as PEGylated Reservoirs of Omega-3 Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids: Structural Insights toward Delivery Formulations against Neurodegenerative Disorders. American Chemical Society. 2018/03/3. doi: 10.1021/acsomega.7b01935), is persuasive in view of amendments made to the claims. The rejection is herewith withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments over the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of claims 1, 4-5, 9, 11, 13-15 Angelova et al. (Liquid Crystalline Nanostructures as PEGylated Reservoirs of Omega-3 Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids: Structural Insights toward Delivery Formulations against Neurodegenerative Disorders. American Chemical Society. 2018/03/3. doi: 10.1021/acsomega.7b01935), in view of Aqeel et al. (ES 2713157 T3) is persuasive in view of amendments made to the claims. The rejection is herewith withdrawn.
The newly modified rejections are as below addressing the claim amendments:
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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, 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 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 1, 5, 9, and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (KR 20070065996 A).
Wang et al. teaches a liquid crystal membrane emulsion composition comprises 10-80 parts by weight of fat and oil containing highly unsaturated fatty acid; 10-80 parts by weight of fat and oil containing a middle chain fatty acid; 1-10 parts by weight of the lecithin containing 25-85 wt% of phospholipid; and 1-15 parts by weight of a glycerin fatty acid ester. Preferably, the highly unsaturated fatty acid is DHA, EPA, gamma-linolenic acid or arachidonic acid (claim 9). The glycerin fatty acid ester is preferably selected from the group consisting of glycerin monolaurate, glycerin monooleate, polyglycerine-2-oleate, polyglycerine-2-stearate, and mixtures thereof. The composition of the present invention is a fat or oil containing polyunsaturated fatty acid is encapsulated in the micro-liquid crystal film, the oxidation stability is ensured, long-term storage is possible, and easy handling (reads on soft capsule). The fats and oils containing polyunsaturated fatty acids in the present invention are vegetable oils and animal fats.
While the reference teaches the composition of the claims, the reference fails to teach the weight ratios or omega-3-fatty acid amount, as claimed.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to use liquid crystal formers or omega-3-fatty acid claimed amounts. The motivation to use liquid crystal formers or omega-3-fatty acid in the amounts claimed is because Wang teaches an amount of less than 1 part by weight is difficult to form a sufficient liquid crystal film and that the emulsion is added to foods. Hence, a skilled artisan would have had reasonable expectation of successfully achieving similar efficacy and results. Additionally, since the general conditions of the claim are taught in the prior art, discovering optimum or workable amounts of liquid crystal formers or omega-3-fatty acid involves only routine skill in the art (In re Aller).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (KR 20070065996 A), as applied to claims 1, 5, 9, and 13-15, in view of Rychen et al. (Safety and efficacy of butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA) as a feed additive for all animal species. EFSA J. 2018;16:e05215.)
Wang et al. is as discussed above.
Wang et al. fails to teach the use of antioxidants in the formulation.
Rychen et al. teaches of butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA) as a feed additive for all animal species.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA). The motivation to incorporate butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA) is because Rychen et al. teaches of butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA) as a feed additive for all animal species. Therefore, a skilled artisan would have reasonable expectation in success to encapsulated in soft gelatin capsules a lipid or lipophilic vehicle.
Conclusion
No claims allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAYLA SOROUSH whose telephone number is (571)272-5008. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday thru Friday; 8:30 AM to 5:00 PM EST.
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:/Awww.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, James Henry Alstrum-Acevedo, can be reached on (571)272-5548. 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.
/LAYLA SOROUSH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1622
Prosecution Insights