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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 04/13/2026 (RCE) and on 03/13/2026 (amended claims and remarks) have been entered.
Application Status
Amended claim 1-6 and 16-19 are under examination.
Claim 7 and 9-14 are withdrawn from examination.
Claim 8 and 15 are cancelled.
Claim 1-6 and 16-19 are rejected.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 03/11/2026 with respect to NPL cite No. 1 fails to comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609 because it is not in English Translation. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered as to the merits. Applicant is advised that the date of any re-submission of any item of information contained in this information disclosure statement or the submission of any missing element(s) will be the date of submission for purposes of determining compliance with the requirements based on the time of filing the statement, including all certification requirements for statements under 37 CFR 1.97(e). See MPEP § 609.05(a).
Claim Objections
Claim 1 objected to because of the following informalities: the recitation in line 3, “and comprising no acetic acid bacteria” should be “and no acetic acid bacteria” since “comprising” is already recited in line 1 and appears to be redundant. 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 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.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sarens et al. (US 2016/0058028 A1) as evidenced by Sales et al. (Ref. U, Volatile, Microbial, and Sensory Profiles and Consumer Acceptance of Coffee Cascara Kombuchas) and by Rodrigo Jose Gomes et al. (Acetic Acid Bacteria in the Food Industry: Systematics, Characteristics and Applications).
Regarding claim 1-6, 16, 17 and 19, Sarens et al. (Sarens) discloses a fermented beverage (beverage composition/ready to drink beverage) (‘028, [0092]-[0093]) comprising fermented coffee material (fermented cascara), including coffee berries (cascara) and coffee beans (‘028, [0020]-[0031], [0105]). It is well known coffee berries includes husks or skins (cascara) of the coffee bean. With respect to the organic compounds as recited in claim 1-5 and 19, and weight ratios; Sarens clearly discloses fermentation of the coffee berries (cascara) and coffee beans with yeast strain, Pichia kluyveri produces increase flavor profiles of natural compounds of fruity flavor taste (‘028, [0021], including isoamyl acetate (‘028, [0023]) also known as isopentyl acetate. Saerens’ fermented beverage (beverage composition/ready to drink beverage) comprising the natural compounds fruity of fruity flavor taste (‘028, [0021] including 2-pheylehtyl acetate, benzaldehyde, isobutyl acetate, 3-mehtylbutanol, and hexyl acetate as evidenced by Sales et al. (Ref. U, pg. 16-19, Table 3). While Saren as evidenced by Sales et al., does not explicitly disclose weight ratios of the natural compounds fruity of fruity flavor taste (‘028, [0021] including isopentyl acetate, 2-pheylehtyl acetate, benzaldehyde, isobutyl acetate, 3-mehtylbutanol, and hexyl acetate; as Sarens uses like materials, coffee berries (cascara) with yeast strain, Pichia kluyveri to obtain the fermented beverage product; it would therefore be expected that Saren’s fermented beverage (beverage composition/ready to drink beverage) will have the same characteristics claimed, particularly the that the amount ratios of the natural compounds fruity of fruity flavor taste including isopentyl acetate, 2-pheylehtyl acetate, benzaldehyde, isobutyl acetate, 3-mehtylbutanol, and hexyl acetate, absence a showing of unexpected results.
With respect to the new limitation of claim 1, “…no acetic acid bacteria…”, Sarens clearly discloses fermentation of the coffee berries (cascara) and coffee beans with the yeast strain, Pichia kluyveri produces increase flavor profiles of natural compounds of fruity flavor taste (‘028, [0021]); wherein Sarens’ Pichia kluyveri is not an acetic acid bacteria as evidenced by Rodrigo Jose Gomes (pg. 139, Introduction, 1st-3rd paragraphs); hence Sarens’ method comprises no acetic acid bacteria.
With respect to claim 16 and 17, Sarens discloses the fermented coffee material (fermented cascara), including coffee berries (cascara) and coffee beans (‘028, [0020]-[0031], [0105]). It is well known coffee berries includes husks or skins (cascara) of the coffee bean. Saren’s fermented coffee material includes fermented coffee berries (cascara), which is considered a fermented cascara extract, wherein the husk/skins are a part of the whole coffee berries.
Regarding claim 18, Saren’s fermented beverage (beverage composition/ready to drink beverage) does not disclose an ethanol content in other words a zero amount of ethanol content, which is in range with the cited range of below 1.2 wt%. It is noted the cited range encompasses a zero amount of ethanol content.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/13/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant asserts “…Saerens does not teach or suggest fermentation of coffee berries occurring in the absence of acetic acid bacteria or a resulting beverage composition lacking AAB-derived metabolites or AAB. Thus, Saerens fails to teach or disclose the limitations of Claim 1. Sales does not cure the deficiencies of Saerens. Sales explicitly discloses the formation of acetic acid, a noted metabolite of AAB. Saerens and Sales both fail to teach, suggest, or disclose a beverage composition comprising fermented cascara or fermented cascara extract, wherein a weight ratio of 2- phenylethyl acetate to benzaldehyde is greater than 1 and comprising no acetic acid bacteria…”.
With respect to the new limitation of claim 1, “…no acetic acid bacteria…”, Sarens clearly discloses fermentation of the coffee berries (cascara) and coffee beans with the yeast strain, Pichia kluyveri produces increase flavor profiles of natural compounds of fruity flavor taste (‘028, [0021]); wherein Sarens’ Pichia kluyveri is not an acetic acid bacteria as evidenced by Rodrigo Jose Gomes (pg. 139, Introduction, 1st-3rd paragraphs); hence Sarens’ method comprises no acetic acid bacteria.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., resulting beverage composition lacking AAB-derived metabolites) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Additionally, it is not clear as what are AAB-derived metabolites since the instant specification and the instant claims are voided in a disclosure or claims of these AAB-derived metabolites.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Sales is relied upon evidence to the natural compounds fruity of fruity flavor taste (‘028, [0021] including 2-pheylehtyl acetate, benzaldehyde, isobutyl acetate, 3-mehtylbutanol, and hexyl acetate. (pg. 16-19, Table 3).
Additionally, the organic compounds as recited in claim 1-5 and 19, and weight ratios; Sarens clearly discloses fermentation of the coffee berries (cascara) and coffee beans with yeast strain, Pichia kluyveri produces increase flavor profiles of natural compounds of fruity flavor taste (‘028, [0021], including isoamyl acetate (‘028, [0023]) also known as isopentyl acetate. Saerens’ fermented beverage (beverage composition/ready to drink beverage) comprising the natural compounds fruity of fruity flavor taste (‘028, [0021] including 2-pheylehtyl acetate, benzaldehyde, isobutyl acetate, 3-mehtylbutanol, and hexyl acetate as evidenced by Sales et al. (Ref. U, pg. 16-19, Table 3). While Saren as evidenced by Sales et al., does not explicitly disclose weight ratios of the natural compounds fruity of fruity flavor taste (‘028, [0021] including isopentyl acetate, 2-pheylehtyl acetate, benzaldehyde, isobutyl acetate, 3-mehtylbutanol, and hexyl acetate; as Sarens uses like materials, coffee berries (cascara) with yeast strain, Pichia kluyveri to obtain the fermented beverage product; it would therefore be expected that Saren’s fermented beverage (beverage composition/ready to drink beverage) will have the same characteristics claimed, particularly the that the amount ratios of the natural compounds fruity of fruity flavor taste including isopentyl acetate, 2-pheylehtyl acetate, benzaldehyde, isobutyl acetate, 3-mehtylbutanol, and hexyl acetate.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HONG THI YOO whose telephone number is (571)270-7093. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 7AM to 3PM.
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.
/HONG T YOO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1792
Prosecution Insights