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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 01/02/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 01/02/02026 has been entered. Claims 1, 4-5, 9 and 11-16 remain pending in the application.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 1, after the initial recitation of “bare nuts” on line 3, all subsequent recitations should read “the bare nuts”, not simply “bare nuts”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 9, 12, and 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caws (US 20140030376 A1) in view of Amy (Candied Pecans), Darling (Sweet and Spicy Maple Nuts), Lisa (Cashew Nuts), CooksInfo (Walnuts), Kaitlin (Maple-Vanilla Candied Nuts), Cuisinefiend (maple and spice roasted nuts), and Vermont Public (Maple Sugared Nuts).
Regarding claim 1, Caws teaches (Paragraph 0002, 0010-0011) methods of making gluten-free, ready-to-eat food compositions, wherein the food product may be free-flowing, e.g., may be in the form of cereal, granola, or snack mix, and may include a plurality of nuts. Caws further teaches (Paragraph 0032) the food product may include a sweetener, wherein a preferred sweetener is maple syrup. Also, Caws teaches (Paragraph 0046, 0050) the food product is desirably heated in an oven set at a temperature that browns and/or crisps the food product in a commercially reasonable amount of time at temperatures of from about 200 °F to about 450 °F, which overlaps with the claimed temperature. Additionally, Caws teaches (Paragraph 0013) in some embodiments, the food product may be heated in an oven for at least about 20 minutes (which overlaps with the claimed range of about 15 to about 30 minutes). In addition, Caws teaches (Paragraph 0050) an exemplary embodiment, wherein a food product is prepared by combining ingredients including both maple syrup and pecans (nuts) and heating in an oven with stirring (agitating) followed by removal from the oven for cooling.
It is noted that Caws does not explicitly describe the nuts as being roasted. However, as noted in the Applicant’s Specification (Paragraph 0034) the term "roasting" refers to a cooking by prolonged exposure to each in an oven or over an open fire. Consequently, the nuts subjected to oven cooking are understood to be roasted.
Furthermore, while Caws describes the inclusion of both nuts and maple syrup in the food product, Caws does not explicitly state that the bare nuts are coated with maple syrup to form coated nuts. Also, Caws teaches a broad range that encompasses, but is not specific to 425 °F. Caws is silent on a ratio of the amount of maple syrup to the amount of bare nuts being 1000 milliliters to 1500 milliliters of maple syrup to about 10 pounds of bare nuts. Caws is further silent on agitating the coated nuts every 4 to 5 minutes to provide for sugar in the maple syrup to remain in solution while coating the coated nuts until the end of the period of time.
Amy teaches (Instructions) a method for making candied pecans wherein pecans are coated in maple syrup and baked in an oven heated to 425 for 15 to 20 minutes and mixed a few times (agitated) during the cooking process.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Caws to coat the nuts with the maple syrup and place the coated nuts into a cooking apparatus set at about 425 °F for a period of time in a range of about 15 minutes to about 30 minutes as taught by Amy since both are directed to methods of preparing food products comprising nuts and maple syrup by oven cooking for a period of time in a range of about 15 minutes to about 30 minutes with agitation, since coating nuts with maple syrup prior to oven cooking and placing the coated nuts into a cooking apparatus set at about 425 °F for a period of time in a range of about 15 minutes to about 30 minutes is known in the art as shown by Amy, since coating the nuts with maple syrup would ensure an even distribution of ingredients for a consistent taste and texture, since nuts coated with maple syrup will have a sweeter taste that many consumers prefer, and since making candied pecans with maple syrup is less complicated compared to other recipes and relies on simple ingredients (Amy, Paragraph 1), and since cooking the maple syrup coated pecans at 425 for 20 minutes will successfully cook the nuts, making them nice and candied and allowing salt to adhere to the pecans (Amy, Paragraphs 7,8).
Thus, the claimed cooking temperature of 425 is known in the art as demonstrated by Amy.
Additionally, the claimed cooking temperature of 425 °F would have been used during the course of normal experimentation and optimization procedures in the method of Caws, as modified above, based upon factors such as the type of nut being roasted (where a higher temperature will lead to a faster/greater increase for small or less dense types of nuts), the intended cooking time (where a higher temperature will result in faster roasting), the desired degree of cooking/roasting, the amounts of nuts and maple syrup used, the size and shape of the nuts, the type of cooking (conventional or convection baking), the amount and type of pre-processing of the nuts etc. Furthermore, the Applicant does not appear to have identified any unique or unexpected benefit from the claimed cooking temperature of 425 °F that would render it non-obvious.
Additionally, the claimed ratio of the amount of maple syrup to the amount of bare nuts being 1000 milliliters to 1500 milliliters of maple syrup to about 10 pounds of bare nuts would have been used during the course of normal experimentation and optimization procedures in the method of Caws based upon factors such as the intended sugar content of the food (where a greater amount or proportion of maple syrup would result in a higher sugar content), the intended nutritional content of the food (where nuts contain protein, vitamins, etc., and an increase in the amount of proportion of nuts would increase the protein content, vitamin content, etc.), the desired flavor or taste (where a greater proportion of maple syrup would result in a sweeter product), the relative amounts of other ingredients, the intended texture and appearance of the food product, etc. Furthermore, the Applicant does not appear to have identified any unique or unexpected benefit from the claimed ratio of the amount of maple syrup to the amount of bare nuts being 1000 milliliters to 1500 milliliters of maple syrup to about 10 pounds of bare nuts that would render it non-obvious.
Further, since Caws is silent with regards to a ratio of the amount of maple syrup to the amount of bare nuts one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to look to the art for suitable ratios.
Darling teaches (Instructions, Ingredients) a method of making sweet and spicy maple nuts comprising placing maple syrup coated nuts into an oven, wherein 3 cups of raw, unsalted walnuts and 3 cups of raw, unsalted cashews are coated with ¾ quarter cup (177.4 ml) maple syrup.
Lisa teaches 1 cup of whole cashews weighs 128 g (0.28 lb).
CooksInfo teaches (Equivalents for Walnuts) 1 cup of whole walnuts weights 115 g (0.25 lb).
The total weight of 3 cups of each type of nut is 1.61 pounds. The resultant ratio is 1.61 pounds of nuts per 177.4 ml of maple syrup or 0.0091 lb nuts/ml maple syrup. This falls withing the claimed range of 10 pounds of nuts to 1000-1500 ml of maple syrup (0.0067-0.01 pounds of nuts/ml maple syrup).
Additionally, Kaitlin teaches (Ingredients) maple-vanilla candied nuts comprising 2 cups of walnuts (230 g or 0.507 lb) and 1/3 cup of maple syrup (80 ml), with a resultant ratio of 0.0063 pounds of nuts/ml maple syrup, which also falls within the claimed range.
Selection of a known ingredient ratio (weight of nuts to volume of maple syrup) based on its suitability for its intended use (roasting nuts coated in maple syrup) supports a prima facie obviousness determination (See MPEP 2144.07).
Cuisinefiend teaches (Method) a method for preparing maple and spice roasted nuts wherein nuts are coated in maple syrup and baked for 20-25 minutes with stirring (agitation) every 5 minutes.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Caws, as modified above, to agitate the coated nuts at regular intervals of every 5 minutes as taught by Cuisinefiend, since both are directed to methods of roasting nuts and maple syrup with agitation during cooking, since agitating the nuts at regular intervals of every 5 minutes is known in the art as shown by Cuisinefiend, since agitating the nuts at regular intervals of every 5 minutes will ensure they are moved/flipped and, consequently, evenly cooked and not burned, since agitating the nuts at regular intervals of every 5 minutes will prevent them from sticking to the cooking tray, and since agitating the nuts at regular intervals of every 5 minutes will ensure that the coating of maple syrup on the nuts and the texture of the finished product remains consistent.
Thus, Caws, as modified above, teaches a method preparing a food product comprising a mixture of nuts and maple syrup, wherein the food product is agitated during cooking. Consequently, the method of Caws, which meets the limitations of the Applicant’s claimed method, would likely, if not necessarily result in the sugars within the maple syrup to remaining in solution while coating the coated nuts until the end of the period of time. Moreover, the Applicant’s claims do not include or identify any distinct features of the agitation process the result in the maple syrup remaining in solution while coating the coated nuts until the end of the period of time.
Furthermore, it is known in the art from Vermont Public (0:01-0:15; 3:30-4:14) a method of making maple coated nuts, wherein, during stirring of the maple coated nuts, the nuts will go from a wet sticky mass of syrupy nuts to syrup that will “sugar off”, wherein it solidifies and becomes dry, instead of the nuts clinging together in one big mass.
This resembles the process described in the Applicant’s Specification (Paragraph 0062), wherein the maple syrup coating the nuts remains in solution while agitation causes the sugar in the maple syrup to crystallize and come out of solution.
Consequently, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to perform agitation in the process of Caws, as modified above, to encourages sugars within the maple syrup to remain in solution while coating the coated nuts until the end of the period of time since Caws already discloses performing agitation, since Vermont Public discloses that agitating maple syrup coated nuts results in sugaring off which prevents the nuts from clinging together in one big mass, ensuring that the nuts can be served and consumed individually, and removing the need to separate a mass of nuts after cooking, since some consumers will prefer the taste and texture of nuts where agitating the coated nuts encourages sugars within the maple syrup to remain in solution, and since keeping the sugars in solution can provide a desirable appearance to the coated nuts.
Regarding claim 4, Caws, as modified above, is silent on agitating the coated nuts including manually turning over the nuts with an instrument.
Darling teaches (Instructions) a method of making sweet and spicy maple nuts comprising placing maple syrup coated nuts into an oven, toss the nuts and syrup with a rubber spatula (instrument) after a set time has passed, and cooking for another set time to completion.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Caws, as modified above, to manually turn over the nuts with an instrument as taught by Darling since both are directed to methods of roasting nuts mixed with maple syrup including agitating during roasting, since manually turning over the nuts with an instrument is known in the art as shown by Darling, since using an instrument prevents direct contact with the nuts, preventing food contamination or harm to the person performing the turning, since performing the agitation manually removes the need for automated equipment which will make production more expensive and potentially require maintenance, and since manually turning over the nuts with an instrument will ensure that the person performing the cooking process is aware of the state of the nuts at the time of agitation due to direct interaction.
Regarding claim 9, as shown above, Caws teaches (Paragraph 0013) in some embodiments, the food product may be heated in an oven for at least about 20 minutes (which encompasses the claimed range of about 20 to about 25 minutes).
Also, the claimed cooking time of about 20 to about 25 minutes is known in the art.
For example, Amy teaches (Instructions) a method for making candied pecans wherein pecans are coated in maple syrup and baked in an oven heated to 425 for 15 to 20 minutes (which overlaps with the claimed range of 20 to 25 minutes) and mixed a few times (agitated) during the cooking process).
Additionally, the claimed cooking time of about 20 to about 25 minutes or about 22 to about 24 minutes would have been used during the course of normal experimentation and optimization procedures in the method of Caws, as modified above, based upon factors such as the type of nut being roasted (where larger or thicker nuts will take longer to cook through), the desired degree of cooking/roasting (where a longer time will cook the nuts more thoroughly), the amounts of nuts and maple syrup used, the size and shape of the nuts, the type of cooking (conventional or convection baking), the amount and type of pre-processing of the nuts, the inclusion of other ingredients, etc. Furthermore, the Applicant does not appear to have identified any unique or unexpected benefit from the claimed cooking time of about 20 to about 25 minutes or about 22 to about 24 minutes that would render it non-obvious.
Regarding claim 12, Caws teaches (Paragraph 0050) an exemplary embodiment, wherein ingredients including pecans (nuts) and maple syrup are combined and placed on a baking tray which is subsequently placed in an oven.
Regarding claim 14, Caws teaches (Paragraph 0033) examples of suitable nuts that can be included in the food product include walnuts, almonds, hazelnuts, and cashews.
Regarding claim 15, Caws teaches (Paragraph 0046) the food product is baked in an oven, which may be a convection oven.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caws (US 20140030376 A1) in view of Amy (Candied Pecans), Darling (Sweet and Spicy Maple Nuts), Lisa (Cashew Nuts), CooksInfo (Walnuts), Kaitlin (Maple-Vanilla Candied Nuts), Cuisinefiend (maple and spice roasted nuts), and Vermont Public (Maple Sugared Nuts), and further in view of Ozug (Fancy Roasted Cocktail Nuts).
Regarding claim 5, Caws, as modified above, is silent on prior to mixing the bare nuts with the maple syrup, adding one or more ingredients to the bare nuts.
Ozug teaches (Directions) a method of preparing roasted cocktail nuts comprising stirring to combine cashews, walnuts, pecans, almonds, orange zest, rosemary, cayenne, and sea salt, followed by drizzling over the maple syrup and stirring to distribute evenly.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Caws, as modified above, to add one or more ingredients to the bare nuts prior to mixing the bare nuts with the maple syrup as taught by Ozug since both are directed to methods of preparing food products comprising oven roasted nuts and maple syrup, since adding one or more ingredients to the bare nuts prior to mixing the bare nuts with the maple syrup is known in the art as shown by Ozug, since adding one or more ingredients can providing additional and/or improved nutritional value to the food product, since adding one or more ingredient can improve the flavor of the coated nuts, and since adding ingredients prior to coating with maple syrup will ensure that the additional ingredients and the nuts are in direct contact and will remain held together by the syrup.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caws (US 20140030376 A1) in view of Amy (Candied Pecans), Darling (Sweet and Spicy Maple Nuts), Lisa (Cashew Nuts), CooksInfo (Walnuts), Kaitlin (Maple-Vanilla Candied Nuts), Cuisinefiend (maple and spice roasted nuts), and Vermont Public (Maple Sugared Nuts), and further in view of Childs (Granulated Maple Sugar).
Regarding claim 11, Caws, as modified above, is silent on, after removing the roasted nuts from the cooking apparatus, collecting crystallized sugar from the cooking apparatus.
Kaitlin teaches (Tips For Success) a method of preparing maple-vanilla candied nuts, wherein the nuts are cooked long enough for the natural sugars in the maple syrup to crystallize. The images included in Kaitlin also show particulate matter separated from the cooked maple syrup coated nuts.
Childs teaches (Temperature and Glucose Level, Stirring) the maple sugar is made by heating and stirring maple syrup until in crystallizes into maple sugar. Childs further teaches (Background) Granulated Maple Sugar is totally shelf stable, will not separate or mold, can be stored indefinitely at room temperature, can be used in recipes as a replacement for brown or white sugar, can be reconstituted into maple syrup of any density and from there converted into any of the other maple confections, can also be used as a topping on cereal, placed in sugar straws or used anywhere other sugar would be used to add flavor or sweetness.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Caws, as modified above, to collect crystallized sugar from the cooking apparatus after removing the roasted nuts, since it is known that maple syrup crystallizes when cooking maple syrup coated nuts from Kaitlin, since recovering additional food matter from production of the roasted nuts will prevent waste and improve efficiency, and since maple sugar is totally shelf stable, will not separate or mold, can be stored indefinitely at room temperature, can be used in recipes as a replacement for brown or white sugar, can be reconstituted into maple syrup of any density and from there converted into any of the other maple confections, can also be used as a topping on cereal, placed in sugar straws or used anywhere other sugar would be used to add flavor or sweetness (Childs, Background).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caws (US 20140030376 A1) in view of Amy (Candied Pecans), Darling (Sweet and Spicy Maple Nuts), Lisa (Cashew Nuts), CooksInfo (Walnuts), Kaitlin (Maple-Vanilla Candied Nuts), Cuisinefiend (maple and spice roasted nuts), and Vermont Public (Maple Sugared Nuts), and further in view of Bailey (Maple Honey Roasted Almonds and Cashews).
Regarding claim 13, Caws, as modified above, is silent on the tray being lined with aluminium foil and placing the coated nuts onto the tray including placing the coated nuts onto the aluminium foil lining the tray.
Bailey teaches (Instructions) a method for preparing maple honey roasted almonds and cashews, wherein the nuts are spread onto a half sheet pan lined with heavy duty aluminium foil prior to roasting in an oven.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of Caws, as modified above, to line the tray with aluminium foil and place the coated nuts onto the aluminium foil lining the tray as taught by Bailey since both are directed to methods of preparing food products including nuts and maple syrup cooked on a tray in an oven, since lining the tray with aluminium foil and placing the coated nuts onto the aluminium foil lining the tray is known in the art as shown by Bailey, since the aluminium foil will cover the tray, reducing the cleaning process, since the aluminium will prevent the nuts from sticking to the tray, making removal easier, and since the aluminium can be easily acquired and subsequently disposed of after use.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caws (US 20140030376 A1) in view of Amy (Candied Pecans), Darling (Sweet and Spicy Maple Nuts), Lisa (Cashew Nuts), CooksInfo (Walnuts), Kaitlin (Maple-Vanilla Candied Nuts), Cuisinefiend (maple and spice roasted nuts), and Vermont Public (Maple Sugared Nuts), and further in view of Rebecca (Cinnamon Maple Candied Almonds).
Regarding claim 16, Caws, as modified above, is silent on the maple syrup being a dark maple syrup.
Rebecca teaches a method for preparing cinnamon maple candied almonds comprising coating almonds in a mixture including maple syrup and baking in an oven, wherein a dark maple syrup is preferred because it takes less syrup to impart a maple flavor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Caws, as modified above, to use dark maple syrup as the maple syrup as taught by Rebecca since both are directed to methods of preparing food products including nuts and maple syrup, since using dark maple syrup when making syrup coated nuts is known in the art as shown by Rebecca, since many consumers will prefer the taste of dark maple syrup, since dark maple syrup can will give the roasted nuts a more appealing appearance to many consumers, and since dark maple syrup takes less syrup to impart a maple flavor (Rebecca).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 4-8, filed 01/02/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, these arguments have been made in view of amendments to the claims, and, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made over Caws (US 20140030376 A1) in view of Caws (US 20140030376 A1) in view of Amy (Candied Pecans), Darling (Sweet and Spicy Maple Nuts), Lisa (Cashew Nuts), CooksInfo (Walnuts), Kaitlin (Maple-Vanilla Candied Nuts), Cuisinefiend (maple and spice roasted nuts), and Vermont Public (Maple Sugared Nuts) as shown above.
Regarding the Applicant’s argument that claimed combination of coating the bare nuts in maple syrup using the claimed ratio of an amount of bare nuts to an amount of maple syrup provides in combination with the claimed frequency of regular agitation during cooking provides for heating the bare nuts at higher temperatures (e.g., 425 °F) and longer times (e.g., durations of 15-30 minutes), as claimed, than in other prior art processes, the Examiner notes that, the disclosed cooking temperature range of 200 °F to about 450 °F and cooking time of 20 minutes in Caws overlaps or encompass the Applicant’s claimed values, and Caws does not indicate burning of the nuts or any other components. Furthermore, as shown above, Amy teaches successfully cooking maple syrup coated nuts within the claimed temperature and time range. Additionally, the fact that the inventor has recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious. See Ex parte Obiaya, 227 USPQ 58, 60 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1985). Furthermore, the Examiner notes that Paragraph 0062 of the Applicant’s Specification from which the Applicant draws support, only discloses that the maple syrup remains in solution at temperatures greater than 350°F as a result of agitation, and does not specify any particular or unique effect from the claimed time and temperature values or the claimed frequency of agitation.
In response to the Applicant’s argument that Caws does not teach the inclusion of maple syrup to coat the nuts and that paragraph [0032] of Caws describes the use of maple syrup simply as a sweetener, the Examiner notes that Caws teaches (Paragraph 0050) an exemplary embodiment, wherein a food product is prepared by combining ingredients including both maple syrup and pecans (nuts) and heating in an oven with stirring (agitating), where such combination and agitation would likely if not necessarily result in the maple syrup coating the nuts. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Caws to coat the nuts with the maple syrup as taught by Amy for the reasons stated above with regard to claim 1.
Regarding the Applicant’s argument that the Le reference teaches away from increasing the temperature of roasting nuts to 425°F, as is claimed in present claim 1, and specifically, Le teaches to roast the nuts at 350°F and for 10-15 minutes as "nuts can burn really easily", the Examiner notes that Le is no longer relied upon, and Amy discloses cooking maple syrup coated nuts within the claimed temperature and time range.
For the reasons stated above, claim 1, and all dependent claims remain rejected under 35 USC 103.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AUSTIN P TAYLOR whose telephone number is (571)272-2652. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30am-5pm.
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.
/AUSTIN PARKER TAYLOR/Examiner, Art Unit 1792
/VIREN A THAKUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1792