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 without traverse of group I, claims 1-9 in the reply filed on 27 August 2025 is acknowledged. Claims 10-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
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 (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 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 1-7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rao (2008) Thermophysical Properties of Sugarcane, Palmyra Palm, and Date-palm Granular Jaggery, International Journal of Food Properties, 11:4, 876-886, DOI: 10.1080/10942910701671281.
Regarding claim 1, Rao teaches a method for preparing a sweetener comprising:
Providing raw palm sap (pg. 877)
Heating the raw palm sap to form a concentrated hot syrup (Fig. 1)
Drying the hot concentrated syrup (Fig. 1)
Grinding the concentrate (Fig. 1)
Drying the granulate to a moisture content of 2.1% (Pg. 877, Table 3)
Regarding claim 2, the disclosure of a moisture content of 2.1% by Rao is interpreted to read on 2% as recited in claim 2 when the value of Rao is rounded to the same number of significant figures as claimed.
Regarding claim 3, Rao discloses air drying the hot concentrated syrup. (Fig. 1)
Regarding claim 4, the granular product of Rao is disclosed to be dried in a desiccator which is interpreted to read on air drying. (Pg. 877)
Regarding claims 5-7, the sweetener of Rao is produced from palmyra palm sap which is the same palm sap disclosed by applicant as having the components recited in claims 5-7. Therefore, the sweetener of Rao necessarily has the same components recited in claims 5-7.
Regarding claim 9, Rao discloses drying the hot concentrated syrup for 14 hrs. (Fig. 1)
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.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rao (2008) Thermophysical Properties of Sugarcane, Palmyra Palm, and Date-palm Granular Jaggery, International Journal of Food Properties, 11:4, 876-886, DOI: 10.1080/10942910701671281 as applied to claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 8, Rao teaches what has been recited above. Rao teaches a drying temperature of 50°C.
While the drying temperature of Rao is less than recited in claim 8, no criticality has been demonstrated for the claimed drying temperature. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have increased the drying temperature in order to decrease the drying time while avoiding increasing the temperature above a point where the components of the syrup begin degrading. Generally, differences in concentration or temperature will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration or temperature is critical. "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955) (Claimed process which was performed at a temperature between 40°C and 80°C and an acid concentration between 25% and 70% was held to be prima facie obvious over a reference process which differed from the claims only in that the reference process was performed at a temperature of 100°C and an acid concentration of 10%.) (MPEP 2144.05 II A, emphasis added)
Unlike the case law cited, in the instant case, the only difference between the claims and the prior art is the temperature at which the drying is performed. As such, claim 8 does not provide a patentable distinction over the prior art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michele L Jacobson whose telephone number is (571)272-8905. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday from 10-6.
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, Emily Le can be reached at (571) 272-0903. 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.
/Michele L Jacobson/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1793