Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/915,468

CROSS-MAILLARDIZED PLANT SUBSTRATES

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Sep 28, 2022
Examiner
CHAWLA, JYOTI
Art Unit
1791
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Atomo Coffee Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
52%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 10m
To Grant
82%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 52% of resolved cases
52%
Career Allow Rate
432 granted / 824 resolved
-12.6% vs TC avg
Strong +30% interview lift
Without
With
+30.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 10m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
857
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
54.4%
+14.4% vs TC avg
§102
9.3%
-30.7% vs TC avg
§112
26.7%
-13.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 824 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 I (claims 1-37) and amending claims 38-46 and 48-49 (originally group II) to be product- by process claims in the reply filed on 6/24/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is also noted and arguments found persuasive in light of the new amendments of 6/24/25. Since the amended claims 38-46 and 48 and 49 now depend from claims 36 and 37, product-by-process claims, the product claims 38-46 and 48-49 will also be treated as product-by process claims. Claims 1-37 and 38-49 are examined in this application and claims 50-73 directed to non-elected invention are withdrawn from further consideration. The requirement as stated above is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1-46 and 48-49 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The term “substrate carrier material” in claims 1-2, 6, 8-10, 13-17, 19, 22, 24-25, 30-32, 35, 37-46 and 48-49 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substrate carrier material” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For the purposes of this office action term “substrate carrier material” will be applicable to any sold material. The term “endogenous” and ‘exogenous” in claims 1 and dependent claims is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The terms “endogenous” and ‘exogenous” are not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For the purposes of this office action terms “endogenous” and ‘exogenous” will be applicable to two distinct or separate sources. The terms of water activity namely “Low water activity” and “Low water activity Maillard product or LWACMP” or “High water activity” or “High water activity Maillard product or HWACMP” in claims 1-2 and other dependent claims are relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “Low water activity Maillard product or LWACMP” or “High water activity Maillard product or HWACMP” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Since the extent of reactions to product Maillard products have not been provided, the features of water activity and its relation to either producing low or high water activity Maillard products is indistinguishable from prior art. For the purposes of this office action terms of low or high water activity will be regarded to include any water activity range as provided in the prior art. 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. 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 1-49 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (GB2500662A), hereinafter D1. Claims 1-49 are in general directed to a method of preparing a beverage component, comprising: contacting a substrate carrier material, having an endogenous Maillard-reactive nitrogen constituent and/or an endogenous Maillard-reactive carbohydrate constituent, with an exogenous Maillard reagent comprising an exogenous Maillard-reactive nitrogen constituent and/or an exogenous Maillard-reactive carbohydrate constituent to provide a conditioned substrate carrier material; and adjusting the water activity (aw) of the conditioned substrate carrier material to a value less than that of the conditioning reaction, and reacting, during the adjusting and/or at the adjusted aw value, the exogenous Maillard reagent with the endogenous Maillard-reactive nitrogen constituent and/or with the endogenous Maillard-reactive carbohydrate constituent to provide a low water activity (low aw) cross-Maillardized substrate carrier material having cross-Maillard reaction products (LWACMP) formed by the reaction between the exogenous Maillard reagent, and the endogenous Maillard-reactive constituent(s). D1 discloses modification of the aromatic traits of green coffee beans and coffee beverages obtained with such treated beans, and specifically discloses the following technical features. D1 discloses a modification of the aromatic properties of green coffee beans and a method for obtaining a coffee beverage with such treated coffee beans (D1 page 4, 1-1) line 28, page 5, lines 1-5 and 19-27, page 6, lines 1-9 and 20-24, page 7, line 8-17, page 8, line 21-30, page 9-10, line 1-30, page 11, line 1-14, page 12, line 4-29, page 13, line 1-26, page 14, line 1-9, page 28, line 17-29, page 29, line 1-20). D1 is silent in that no exogenous Maillard-reactive nitrogen constituent or use exogenous Maillard-reactive nitrogen constituent to replace sugar in D1. thus a cross-Maillard-primed substrate carrier material that is slightly different from the prior art. However, D1 further discloses that: it is 5 assumed that during roasting of green coffee beans free amino acids could react with sugars, such as glucose and fructose, in the so-called "Maillard" reaction to form substances that are mainly perceived as positive aromatic substances by the consumers; it is hypothesized that roasting will give more satisfactory results if the relative amounts of free amino acids matches that of sugars in the green coffee beans in an optimal way; according to a non-binding theory it is assumed that in case sugars are relatively scarce, the remaining amino acids, which are not used in the "Maillard" reaction, will bum and form unpleasant aromas during the roasting procedure; it is further assumed that in case amino acids are relatively scarce in relation to the amount of sugars present, the roasting may result in a sweet caramel like-flavor due to transformation of remaining sugars into caramel. It can be seen that D1 teaches that when endogenous nitrogen constituent does not match the carbohydrate, it may lead to unpleasant flavor. Those skilled in the art can also adjust the exogenous added constituent based on the carbohydrate constituent and amino acid constituent of endogenous raw materials, i.e., chose to further add exogenous Maillard-reactive nitrogen constituent, or replace sugar with Maillard-reactive nitrogen ingredient in order to react the exogenous Maillard reagent with the endogenous ingredients. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JYOTI CHAWLA whose telephone number is (571)272-8212. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30- 5:30. 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, Nikki Dees can be reached at 571-270-3435. 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. /JYOTI CHAWLA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1791
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 28, 2022
Application Filed
Sep 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Apr 02, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12575586
HYDROUS OILY FOOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12568988
CHOCOLATE PRODUCTS, INGREDIENTS, PROCESSES AND USES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12564201
PLANT-BASED TEXTURED BASE MATERIAL, AND PRODUCT CONTAINING REPLICA MEAT OBTAINED BY PROCESSING SAID BASE MATERIAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12557824
SYSTEMS FOR PROVIDING SMOKE FLAVOR TO A FOOD ARTICLE OR BEVERAGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12550922
Extruded Gelling Food Products, Extruded Gelling Food Product Ingredients, and Methods for Making Extruded Gelling Food Products and Extruded Food Product Ingredients
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 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
52%
Grant Probability
82%
With Interview (+30.0%)
3y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 824 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