Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/798,548

ALLULOSE IN CRYSTALLINE FORM

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Aug 09, 2022
Examiner
COHEN, STEFANIE J
Art Unit
1732
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Savanna Ingredients GmbH
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
78%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
719 granted / 954 resolved
+10.4% vs TC avg
Minimal +3% lift
Without
With
+2.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
979
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
58.1%
+18.1% vs TC avg
§102
11.8%
-28.2% vs TC avg
§112
20.3%
-19.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 954 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant's election with traverse of Group II, claims 3-10 and 12-13, in the reply filed on 9/2/25 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the applicant traversed the restriction. It is noted that inventions listed as Groups I-V do not relate to a single general inventive concept under PCT Rule 13.1 because, under PCT Rule 13.2, they lack the same or corresponding special technical features as set forth in page 4 of the previous Office Action. Therefore, given that the Examiner has properly established that Groups I-V lack unity as set forth in page 4 of the Office Action mailed 7/8/25, it is the Examiner's position that the restriction is proper. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. 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 3-10, 12-13, 31-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koch et al (US20190315790) in view of Koch et al (US20190297931). Koch teaches the synthesis of D-allulose. Koch, example 19, teaches a purified allulose solution having a purity of 95 wt.-% and containing 3733 g allulose was evaporated to a dry matter content of 86 wt.-%. The solution was stirred at 40 rpm in a crystallizer at a temperature of 50° C. The tempered solution was seeded with the suspension of Example 18. The utilized crystal fraction was 50 μm to 120 μm. The seed crystals amounted to a content of 0.3 wt.-% (seed crystals/g allulose solution). The revolution speed was transiently increased in order to distribute the seed crystals homogenously in the solution and then reset to 40 rpm. The crystallization was performed at a linear cooling gradient of 0.085° C./h and was terminated at 30° C. The suspension was separated for 20 minutes by means of a centrifuge at 8000 rpm. Cover water (desalted) was added at a ratio of 20 vol.-% (desalted water:volume of suspension). 1980 g crystalline allulose were provided corresponding to a yield of 53 wt.-%. Koch, paragraph 87 of the PGPUB, teaches the conversion of educt saccharide, preferably fructose to product saccharide, preferably allulose. It 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 that a solution having a purity of 95 wt.-% allulose would comprise about 5 wt.-% fructose there would be residual fructose present in the solution after the conversion of fructose to allulose. Although Koch teaches concentration by means of an evaporator, Koch does not teach concentrating until the saturation concentration is exceeded. Koch (‘931), paragraph 39 of the PGPUB, teaches allulose remains in solution thereby providing an improved shelf-life and storage stability of aqueous liquid compositions without forming undesirable precipitates. Moreover, allulose syrups can be transported at higher concentrations even at oversaturated concentrations at ambient temperature without crystallization. It 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 to evaporate the crude product composition as taught by Koch to an oversaturated concentration as taught by Koch (‘931) as this reduces the amount of water needs in the remaining process while not crystalizing the solution. Having a purified allulose solution having a purity of 95 wt.-% and further comprising 5 wt.-% fructose as taught by the references reads on providing the allulose preparation as claimed in claim 3, step a. Evaporating the crude product composition to an oversaturated concentration as taught by the references reads on concentrating as claimed in claim 3, step c. Seeding with the allulose suspension as taught by Koch reads on claim 3, step d. Crystallizing performed at a linear cooling gradient of 0.085° C./h to provide a yield of 53 wt.-%. Reads on claim 3, step e. The suspension separated by means of a centrifuge as taught by Koch reads on claim 3, step f. Regarding claims 4-8, Koch, example 19, teaches a purified allulose solution having a purity of 95 wt.-% allulose and further comprising 5 wt.-% fructose. Regarding claims 9-10, Koch, example 19, teaches a purified allulose solution having a purity of 95 wt.-% and containing 3733 g allulose was evaporated to a dry matter content of 86 wt.-%. Regarding claim 12, Koch, paragraph 244 of the PGPUB, teaches concentration of the crude product composition provided in step (c) or of the pre-purified product composition provided in step (d) may be achieved by means of an evaporator, preferably at a temperature below 60° C. Regarding claim 13, Koch, paragraph 277 of the PGPUB, teaches the amount of seed crystals is within the range of from 0.001 wt.-% to 10 wt.-%, relative to the weight of the dry matter contained in said composition. Regarding claim 31, Koch teaches a purified allulose solution having a purity of 95 wt.-%. Regarding claim 32, Koch, paragraph 244 of the PGPUB, teaches concentration of the crude product composition provided in step (c) or of the pre-purified product composition provided in step (d) may be achieved by means of an evaporator, preferably at a temperature below 60° C. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US20200407389 teaches a method for producing functional crystalline sweetener. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEFANIE J COHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5836. The examiner can normally be reached 10am- 6pm M-F. 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, Coris Fung can be reached at (571) 270-5713. 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. /STEFANIE J COHEN/ Examiner, Art Unit 1732 1/27/26
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 09, 2022
Application Filed
Jan 27, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600841
Biodegradable Composition and Method of Preparation Thereof
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595411
Series of Alkali Metal Borophosphates Compounds, and Alkali Metal Borophosphates Nonlinear Optical Crystals as well as Preparation Method and Application thereof
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595179
SYNTHESIS OF UNIFORM DIAMOND NANOPARTICLES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590205
HIGHLY SOLUBLE PEA STARCH AS REPLACER OF MALTODEXTRIN
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590008
PROCESS FOR PRODUCING HIGH PURITY ALUMINIUM MATERIALS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
75%
Grant Probability
78%
With Interview (+2.7%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 954 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