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 without traverse of claims 1-17 in the reply filed on 3/16/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 18-20 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected method, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 03/16/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Meiji Co(JP 2013202003A).
Regarding claim 1, Meiji teaches a frozen porridge comprising at least one frozen porridge rice block comprising rice as a first block and at least one frozen sauce block containing a sauce as a second block(abstract).
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.
Claim(s) 2-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meiji Co(JP 2013202003A).
Regarding claim 2, Mejii does not specifically teach that the rice porridge block contains rice in a content of 22wt% to 26wt%. However, it would have been obvious to adjust the rice content depending on the texture desired in the final product.
Regarding claim 3, Mejii is silent on the viscosity of the rice block. However, it would have been obvious to adjust the viscosity of the rice depending on the texture desired in the final product.
Regarding claims 4 and 5, Mejii does not specifically teach that the porridge has a solid content of 75 to 85% and a moisture content of 15% to 25% in an unfrozen state. However, Mejii teaches that increased water content yields a softer rice product, with a smaller water content creating a harder rice and a larger water content creating a softer rice such as risotto(p.3). Therefore, it would have been obvious to adjust the water content and solid content depending on the texture and hardness desired in the rice block.
Regarding claim 6, Mejii is silent on the salinity content of the rice block. However, Mejii teaches adding “an appropriate amount of seasoning” to the rice block(example 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to adjust the amount of salt depending on the taste desired in the composition.
Regarding claim 7, Mejii is silent on the hardness of the rice porridge block in the unfrozen state. However, Mejii teaches that increased water content yields a softer rice product, with a smaller water content creating a harder rice and a larger water content creating a softer rice such as risotto(p.3). Therefore, it would have been obvious to adjust the water content and solid content depending on the texture and hardness desired in the rice block.
Regarding claim 8, Mejii teaches that the sauce can comprise vegetables(example 1) but does not teach an amount of 40wt% to 70wt% for added flavor. It would have been obvious to adjust the amount of vegetables present depending on the flavor desired.
Regarding claims 9-10, Mejii teaches that the sauce block can contain seafood such as salmon for added flavor(example 1). It would have been obvious to adjust the amount of seafood present depending on the flavor desired. It would have been obvious to use raw or cooked depending on the nature of the intended product.
Regarding claims 15-16, Mejii is silent on the presence of holes or grooves in the blocks. However, it would have been obvious to adjust the shape of the block depending on the nature of the product.
Regarding claim 17, Mejii is silent on the number of rice porridge blocks and number of sauce blocks. However, it would have been obvious to adjust the number of rice sauce and blocks depending on the nature of the product.
Claim(s) 11-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meiji Co(JP 2013202003A) in view of Tetsuya(JP2005000171A).
Regarding claims 11-14 Tetsuya teaches a frozen food product comprising blocks of frozen sauce, rice, and meat and vegetables such that the frozen sauce comprises added starch and gums such as guar gum, xanthan gum, or locust bean gum in order to increase the viscosity of the sauce and ensure that the sauce does not settle during microwave heating. The starches and gum are present in an amount of 0.2 to 4%(p.1-2). It would have been obvious adjust the amount of gums and starches in order to control the viscosity and ensure that the sauce does not settle out upon microwave heating.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATHERINE D LEBLANC whose telephone number is (571)270-1136. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-4PM EST M-F.
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.
/KATHERINE D LEBLANC/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1791
Prosecution Insights