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 .
Priority
This application is a 371 of PCT/JP2021/017931 filed 05/11/2021. Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d) based on application JP 2020-083951 filed 05/12/2020. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/15/2025 complies with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Status of the Claims
Claims 28 and 30-41 are pending. Claims 31-38 are withdrawn. Claims 28 and 30 are amended. Claims 24-27 and 29 are cancelled. Claims 39-41 are new.
Claims 28, 30 and 39-41 (claim set filed 11/03/20245) and are examined on the merits herein.
Withdrawal of Rejections
The response and amendment filed on 11/03/2025 are acknowledged. All of the amendment
and arguments have been thoroughly reviewed and considered.
For the purposes of clarity of the record, the reasons for the Examiner's withdrawal and/or maintaining if applicable, of the substantive or essential claim rejections are detailed directly below and/or in the Examiner's response to arguments section.
The previous claims 24-30 rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) have been withdrawn necessitated by amendment of claim 28 and 30 and cancellation of claims 24-27 and 29.
Maintained/Modified Rejections
The following rejections are maintained and/or modified taking into consideration amendment to claims filed on 11/03/2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 28, 30 and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogawa (JP-08294326-A on record in IDS) in view of Carrasco (Carrasco and Preston Environ. Microbiol., 2020, 22, 858-872) and Ramnath (Ramnath et al. Afr. J. Biotech., 2014, 13, 356-365).
Regarding claims 28, Ogawa teaches fungal bed cultivation method for cultivating various edible mushrooms (paragraph 0002). The culture medium is prepared from raw materials such as sawdust or cereal grains (paragraph 0005). Mushroom is inoculated on the surface of the medium and cultured for a pre-determined period of time (paragraph 0005). The bed is sealed in a bag made of an airtight film (paragraph 0011). Additionally, ventilation holes are made in the airtight film bag via adhesive tape with large number of holes with a diameter of about 1 to 5 μm covering the holes in the bag (paragraph 0028). Ogawa mentions that the ventilation holes facilitate the gas exchange accompanying the growth of bacteria (paragraph 0028). Ogawa describes the advantages of the described method: ”As a result, mushrooms with a good shape and high commercial value can be obtained, and there is also the advantage that the harvesting work does not require much labor” (paragraph 0049).
Ogawa does not teach the culture medium to comprise Bacillus ginsengihumi and Pseudomonas sp. derived from the raw material of the culture medium.
Carrasco teaches growing the edible mushrooms and reviews the role of microorganisms, present in the soil or in the substrate during cultivation, in mushroom growth and fructification (Abstract). Carrasco describes the potential use of microorganisms to increase mushroom productivity through growth promotion or as biocontrol agents to control pests and diseases (Abstract). Carrasco discloses the benefits of bacteria fungi interaction: “The benefits for fungi of forming mutualistic associations with bacteria include the action of helper bacteria in promoting ectomycorrhizal association with plant symbionts, enhanced nutrition through degradation of complex poly-carbohydrates by lignocellulosic enzyme activity, the consumption of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) blocking mushroom fructification by bacteria and secretion of antibiotics to suppress competing fungi or provide protection against crop parasites (p. 858, right column, 2nd paragraph). Carrasco describes cultivation of mushrooms on substrates which can be a sterilized mixture of raw materials or fermented substrates produced by composting of agricultural waste such as wheat straw (p. 859, right column, last paragraph) in the presence of microorganisms. Carrasco discloses that Pseudomonas is one of the dominant genus at the start of cultivation (p. 862, left column, 3rd paragraph) and provides examples of the dominant presence of Pseudomonas during cultivation of different mushrooms in Table 1 (p. 864). Carrasco mentions that other bacterial species such as Bacillus species increase at the end of partial composting (p. 862, left column, 3rd paragraph).
Ramnath teaches analysis of the microflora from Eucalyptus wood chips (Abstract). Ramnath identified multiple bacterial species in wood chips including several Bacillus species, one of which was Bacillus ginsengihumi (p. 362, Table 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to follow Carrasco teaching and expect that the culture medium of Ogawa teaching used for mushroom culturing has Pseudomonas species derived from the raw material. One would have expected Pseudomonas in the culture and/or would have been motivated to add raw material carrying Pseudomonas to the culture since Carrasco teaches that Pseudomonas is the dominant species during cultivation of various mushrooms, describes advantages of bacterial presence during mushroom cultivation and Ogawa does not exclude bacterial presence in the raw material and provides ventilation holes in the fungal bed to facilitate bacterial growth. A skilled artisan would have reasonably expected success in this combination because Ogawa and Carrasco teach fungal cultivation.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add Ramnath teaching to teachings of Ogawa and Carrasco on fungal cultivation and expect that the wood raw material of Ogawa teaching used for mushroom culturing has Bacillus ginsengihumi. One would have expected Bacillus ginsengihumi in the culture and/or would have been motivated to add wood raw material of Ramnath teaching carrying Bacillus ginsengihumi to the culture since Ramnath identified Bacillus ginsengihumi in wood chips, Ogawa uses wood sawdust as raw material for culturing mushrooms and Carrasco determined Bacillus species presence during composting of raw materials used for mushroom cultivation. A skilled artisan would have reasonably expected success in this combination because Ogawa and Carrasco teach cultivation of mushrooms and Carrasco and Ramnath provide description of bacterial species on raw materials used for mushroom cultivation. Thus, Ogawa, Carrasco and Ramnath teachings render claim 28 obvious.
Regarding claim 30, Ogawa teaches that the method comprises fixing a light-shielding film to a predetermined portion of the bag (paragraph 0012). Thus, Ogawa, Carrasco and Ramnath teachings render claim 30 obvious.
Regarding claim 40, Carrasco teaches Pseudomonas fluorescens among bacterial species derived from compost and casing during mushroom cultivation and showing biocontrol action against parasites of cultivated mushroom Agaricus bisporus (Table 2, p. 867).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that Pseudomonas fluorescens can be among predominant Pseudomonas species taught by Carrasco during cultivation of mushrooms by method of Ogawa. One would have been motivated to assume so with reasonably expected success because Carrasco teaches Pseudomonas fluorescens among bacterial species derived from raw materials during mushroom cultivation and Ogawa describes using plant raw materials as culture medium for mushroom cultivation. Thus, Ogawa, Carrasco and Ramnath teachings render claim 40 obvious.
Claims 39 and 41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogawa (JP-08294326-A on record in IDS) in view of Carrasco (Carrasco and Preston Environ. Microbiol., 2020, 22, 858-872) and Ramnath (Ramnath et al. Afr. J. Biotech., 2014, 13, 356-365) as applied to claim 28 above, and further in view of Oh (Oh et al. PLOS One, 2017, 13, e0190948, 1-15 on record in IDS).
The teachings of Ogawa, Carrasco and Ramnath have been set forth above.
Ogawa, Carrasco and Ramnath do not teach Ewingella sp. and Ewingella americana derived from the raw material of the culture medium.
Oh teaches the effect of fruiting body bacteria on the growth of Tricholoma matsutake (pine mushroom, PM) and its related molds (Title, Abstract). Oh mentions that the fruiting body of PM forms in its natural habitat, i.e. pine forest (Abstract) and describes collecting fruiting bodies of PM in the forest (p. 2, 5th paragraph). Oh discloses that among 16 bacterial species isolated from PM fruiting bodies six bacterial species significantly stimulated PM growth and one of these species was Ewingella americana (p. 6, 2nd paragraph). Additionally, five of 16 bacterial species showed a wide range of antifungal activity and Ewingella americana had a suppressive effect on the widest range of mold species (8 molds, 62-82% growth change) (p. 6, 2nd paragraph, p. 7, 1st paragraph).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that Ewingella americana from Oh teaching can be present in the culture medium for cultivation of mushroom based on Ogawa teaching. One would have been motivated to expect that since Oh teaches that Ewingella americana was identified on PM fruiting bodies and was shown to significantly stimulate PM growth, PM was collected in its natural habitat pine forest and hence Ewingella americana can be present on the wood as well and Ogawa uses wood sawdust as raw material for culturing mushrooms. Alternatively pine wood chips can be added to the culture medium of Ogawa teaching to provide source of Ewingella americana since Oh teaches that Ewingella americana stimulated mushroom growth and had a suppressive effect on the widest range of mold species. A skilled artisan would have reasonably expected success in this combination because Ogawa and Carrasco teach cultivation of mushrooms and Oh and Carrasco describe bacterial species associated with mushrooms. Thus, Ogawa, Carrasco, Ramnath and Oh teachings render claims 39 and 41 obvious.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/0/32025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to prior art of Calvo-Garrido have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on Calvo-Garrido reference. Argument regarding prior art of Ogawa and Oh are addressed below.
Applicant argues (addressing p. 10-13 of the Remarks) that “Ogawa is directed to a method of cultivating mushrooms in a sealed and sterilized bag”, Oh teaches mushrooms collected in its natural habitat, pine forest and combination of prior art “would require a change in the basic principles (i.e. sterility) under which Ogawa was intended to operate.” Applicant further argues that in instant claims inoculum of the mushroom is inoculated “into the culture medium that has not been sterilized, but still contains Bacillus ginsengihumi and Pseudomonas sp. Bacterium (see at least paragraphs [0021], [0024], [0030], [0033], [0034]. and throughout the specification as originally filed)”. Applicant refers to Examples showing contamination in the fungal bed sterilized by autoclave and no contamination in fungal bed that were not sterilized and contained specified bacterium. Applicant adds that Ogawa does not disclose favorability of allowing some microbes to survive the sterilization process and Oh does not disclose benefit of heat treatment or sterilization. These arguments are not persuasive because:
The basic principle of Ogawa teaching, i.e. cultivating of mushroom in a fungal bed with the culture medium comprising raw material is not changed by combination with Oh since it was not suggested to combine cultivation of mushroom in Ogawa teaching with pine mushroom growing in the forest of Oh teaching, but to assume that the wood raw material of Ogawa teaching can have the Ewingella americana or alternatively pine wood chips can be added to the culture medium of Ogawa teaching to provide source of Ewingella americana. Although Ogawa does not specifically mentions the bacterial species surviving the sterilization, Ogawa that does not exclude the presence of bacteria and rather provides conditions for bacterial growth, i. e. mentions that the transparency of the fungal bag allows the light rays necessary for bacteria growth to pass through (paragraph 0023) and that the ventilation holes in the bag are necessary for gas exchange accompanying the growth of bacteria (paragraph 0028). Regarding sterilization, the instant application describes heat treatment of the raw substrate with water at temperature from 75° C to about 85° C, preferably about 90° C and more preferably 100° C to kill non-thermophilic bacteria (paragraph 0030). Ogawa teaches heat treatment of the raw substrate with water at 70-80° C (paragraph 0034) that is similar to instant application and hence will provide the same effect of selectively killing non-thermophilic bacteria. Additionally, please note that sterilization or absence of sterilization is not within the scope of instant claims.
Conclusion
No claims are allowed.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LIOUBOV G KOROTCHKINA whose telephone number is (571)270-0911. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 8:00-5:30.
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, Sharmila G Landau can be reached at (571)272-0614. 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.
/L.G.K./Examiner, Art Unit 1653
/SHARMILA G LANDAU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1653