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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/5/2026 has been entered.
Claims
Claims 1-23 are pending.
WITHDRAWN REJECTIONS
All rejections of record in the Office Action mailed 10/7/2025 have been withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendments in the Paper filed 1/5/2026.
NEW REJECTIONS
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Official Correspondence.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1-7 and 17-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The phrase “fat composition … total weight of C8 to C24 fatty acids … present in all triglycerides” in Claim 1, lines 1-8 is new matter as the disclosure as filed does not base the calculation of all triglycerides but rather refers to total palmitic acid (Page 3, paragraph 1 of the Specification.).
PNG
media_image1.png
230
598
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Page 3, paragraph 1 of the Specification also refers to “total glycerides”. Glycerides found in fats are not limited to triglycerides but can also include monoglycerides and diglycerides which can include. Palmitic acid chains (C16:0) can also be at the SN-2 position for monoglycerides and diglycerides.
PNG
media_image2.png
248
656
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fats can include free fatty acids which can be palmitic acid (C16:0).
PNG
media_image3.png
140
488
media_image3.png
Greyscale
When fatty acid profiles are calculated the total fatty acid chains in the fat are determined, not just the fatty acid chains in the triglycerides. This is consistent with Applicant’s language at claim 1, line 6.
PNG
media_image4.png
38
658
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Palmitic acid (C16:0) is a C16 fatty acid. Palmitic acid (C16:0) is not a triglyceride.
Claims 1-7 and 17-23 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 phrase “fat composition, comprising … 20% to 50% … palmitic acid (C16:0) … 20% to 45% … oleic acid (C18:1) … 17% to 40% … linoleic acid (C18:2)” in Claim 1, lines 1-4 is vague and indefinite as it is unclear if the fat composition actually contains very large amount of “acids” as the claim literally states
PNG
media_image3.png
140
488
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
200
502
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
132
604
media_image6.png
Greyscale
or does the fat composition primary contain “esters” in the form of esterified fatty acid chains.
PNG
media_image7.png
275
632
media_image7.png
Greyscale
The phrase “wherein the fat composition is, or is derived from, one or more vegetable fats” in Claim 1, line 13 is vague and indefinite as it unclear how one can determine whether the fat composition is derived from vegetable fats as opposed from animal fats, like human breast milk, when the fatty acids can be identical.
The phrase “fat composition, comprising … 0% to 50% … lauric acid (C12:0)” in Claim 18, lines 1-3 is vague and indefinite as it is unclear if the fat composition actually contains lauric acid with the claimed range as the claim literally states
PNG
media_image8.png
148
422
media_image8.png
Greyscale
or does the fat composition primary contain “esters” including in the form of esterified lauric acid chains.
PNG
media_image9.png
328
450
media_image9.png
Greyscale
ANSWERS TO APPLICANT’S ARGUMENTS
In response to Applicant’s conclusion (See p. 9, para. 1+ of Applicant’s Paper filed 12/4/2025.) that it would not make sense for the “second position” in the context of monoglycerides and diglycerides, it is noted that the Examiner does not follow this conclusion as monoglycerides and diglycerides have SN1, SN2 and SN3 positions just like triglycerides.
PNG
media_image2.png
248
656
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In response to Applicant’s conclusion (See p. 11, para. 1+ of Applicant’s Paper filed 12/4/2025.) that phrase “wherein the fat composition is, or is derived from, one or more vegetable fats” is not vague and indefinite because fat compositions are labelled, animal fats typically contain high amount of cholesterol and other ingredients, it is noted that said arguments are not persuasive as the claims are not directed to a process but rather a composition.
Labelling does not have anything to do with the claimed composition. Patentability of the composition is based on the composition and not what may or may not be on a label of a raw material that has been transformed into other materials.
OPO (1,3-dioleoyi-2-palmitoylglycerol) and OPL (1-oleoyl-2-palmitoyl-3-linoleoyiglycerol) triglycerides are identical no matter if they are derived from vegetable fats or animal fats or microalgae or synthetic fats.
PNG
media_image10.png
224
470
media_image10.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image11.png
278
774
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRENT T O'HERN whose telephone number is (571)272-6385. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 5:00 am - 3:30 pm.
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.
/BRENT T O'HERN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1793 January 24, 2026