Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/910,657

SUNFLOWER PHOSPHOLIPID COMPOSITION CONTAINING PHOSPHATIDYLCHOLINE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Sep 09, 2022
Examiner
ZILBERING, ASSAF
Art Unit
1792
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Lipoid GmbH
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
33%
Grant Probability
At Risk
1-2
OA Rounds
4y 9m
To Grant
60%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 33% of cases
33%
Career Allow Rate
206 granted / 619 resolved
-31.7% vs TC avg
Strong +27% interview lift
Without
With
+27.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 9m
Avg Prosecution
81 currently pending
Career history
700
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.5%
-38.5% vs TC avg
§103
57.9%
+17.9% vs TC avg
§102
10.2%
-29.8% vs TC avg
§112
26.0%
-14.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 619 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . DETAILED ACTION Claims 3-25, 27 and 28 are pending in the current application. Claims 9-25 and 28 are withdrawn from consideration (see discussion, below). Claims 3-8, 21-23 and 27 are examined in the current application. Election/Restrictions Claims 9-25 and 28 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on August 25th 2025. Applicant's election with traverse of claims 3-8, 21-23 and 27 in the reply filed on August 25th 2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the grounds that Greeves fails to disclose the special technical feature “phospholipid composition comprising phosphatidylcholine and an anionic phospholipid compound”. This is not found persuasive because Greeves discloses in the bottom of page 4 to the top of page 5 and in claim 9 of phospholipid composition comprising phosphatidylcholine and an anionic phospholipid compound. 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 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claims 3-8, 21-23 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Greeve et al. (WO 2008/113421 A1) in view of NPL “Lekithos” (from https://lekithos.com/products/organic-sunflower-lecithin-liquid?variant=40467331645540). Regarding claims 21, 22, 27, 3, 4 and 6-8: Greeve discloses a method of preparing an oil-in-water emulsion to be used for parenteral (i.e., subcutaneous) administration by homogenizing an aqueous and an oil phase using a phospholipid composition comprising phosphatidylcholine and an anionic phospholipid compound that is phosphatidylglycerol (e.g., 1,2-dimyristoyl-sn-glycero-3-phophorylglycerol (‘PMPG’)), or phosphatidylethanolamine (see Greeve paragraphs 1, 4 and 5 on page 4, and paragraphs 1 and 2 on page 5, paragraphs 1 and 2; claim 9 on page 3). Greeve discloses sunflower lecithin may be one of the sources of the phospholipid composition (see Greeves paragraphs 4 and 5 on page 4), which is known to comprise about 2100 mg of phosphotidylcholine in about 15g (see Lekithos page 1), which meets the phosphatidylcholine content in claim 7. Regarding claim 5: Greeve discloses the phospholipid composition may comprise a phospholipid compound (e.g., phosphatidylcholine) and an anionic phospholipid compound (e.g., PMPG) or any combination thereof (see Greeve claim 9 on page 3), which encompasses the claimed ratio. Regarding claim 23: Greeve discloses autoclaving the resulting composition (see Greeve paragraph 1 on page 14; Embodiments section on page 17). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ASSAF ZILBERING whose telephone number is (571)270-3029. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00. 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 on (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. /ASSAF ZILBERING/Examiner, Art Unit 1792
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 09, 2022
Application Filed
May 15, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 11, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599143
EMULSIFIED OIL AND FAT COMPOSITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12588688
METHOD FOR PRODUCING AN INGREDIENT COMPRISING A COMBINATION OF AT LEAST THREE MILK PROTEINS AND USE OF THE INGREDIENT OBTAINED
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582135
DHA Enriched Polyunsaturated Fatty Acid Compositions
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577593
DHA ENRICHED POLYUNSATURATED FATTY ACID COMPOSITIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12564198
METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING SN-2 PALMITIC TRIACYLGLYCEROLS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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
33%
Grant Probability
60%
With Interview (+27.2%)
4y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 619 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