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 .
Claims 1-2 and 4-17 are pending in this application.
Claims 11-17 stand withdrawn from further consideration as being directed to non-elected subject matter. Claims 1-2 and 4-10 will presently be examined.
Withdrawn ground of rejection
Although the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph is maintained for the specific reasons (1), (2), and (3) as set forth below, Applicant’s amendment to the claims filed on 11/19/2025 has overcome all other indefiniteness issues discussed in the Office action of 8/21/2025.
The outstanding ground of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, is withdrawn in view of the amendment to the claims filed on 11/19/2025.
35 USC 112(b) or 35 USC (pre-AIA ), second paragraph
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 1-2 and 4-10 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.
(1) The amendatory phrase “at least one carrageenan oligosaccharide polyol or derivative thereof obtained by hydrolytic reduction of carrageenan oligosaccharides” (emphases added) is indefinite. This phrase is ambiguous because it can mean two different substances – the emphasized part can be interpreted to modify only the “derivative thereof” or both the “polyol” and “derivative thereof,” which result in different claim scope as shown below:
(a) carrageenan polyol is obtained by hydrolytic reduction of carrageenan oligosaccharides and derivative of carrageenan polyol is also obtained by hydrolytic reduction of carrageenan oligosaccharides; or
(b) only the derivative of oligosaccharide polyol is obtained by hydrolytic reduction of carrageenan oligosaccharides; carrageenan polyol does not have to be obtained by hydrolytic reduction of carrageenan oligosaccharides.
(2) All the derivatives of carrageenan oligosaccharide polyols recited in amended claim 1 appear to be carrageenan oligosaccharide polyols, not derivative thereof. It is therefore confusing to call something a derivative when there is no indication of derivation beyond the scope of “carrageenan oligosaccharide polyol.”
(3) In claim 1, the phrase “the formulation obtained is free of bio-actives” is confusing and indefinite language. The instant specification defines “bio-actives” as “any type of chemical compound synthesized or released by living organisms which has activity to improve the overall health of living organisms” (paragraph 40). This is extremely broad language, and it would encompass myriad substances such as water, as well as cellular waste, metabolic, remodeling, recycling, and/or degradation products, which would include depolymerized products of carrageenan, which is a cell wall material of seaweed. The depolymerized products would naturally include oligosaccharides that have more than one -OH group, thereby making them polyols. Thus, claim 1 appears to contradict the fact that the claimed oligosaccharide derivative polyols are themselves bio-actives. The specification describes the inventive formulation as promoting plant resistance to abiotic stress caused by drought, salinity, extreme temperatures, water stress, among others (paragraph 52), increasing germination rate of seeds (paragraphs 124-128), increasing proline content and biomass in wheat (paragraphs 131-137), and increasing plant health (paragraph 139). Therefore, the phrase “the formulation obtained is free of bio-actives” is confusing and indefinite.
Applicant’s arguments filed on 11/19/2025 relative to this issue has been considered but they were deemed unpersuasive. Applicant refers to the aforementioned definition found in specification paragraph 40 and argues that “free of bio-actives” means free of “these specified, common growth-promoting components typically found in seaweed extracts (e.g., phytohormones, vitamins, amino acids, and betaines).” Applicant asserts that “definition explicitly excludes water, cellular waste, metabolic products, and depolymerized carrageenan products” (emphasis added), but the specification definition does no such thing. Phytohormones, vitamins, amino acids, betaines mentioned in paragraph 40 are examples, not an exclusive list of bio-actives. For these reasons, rejection based on this issue is maintained.
The claims are rejected as being indefinite for the reasons (1), (2), and (3) as set forth above.
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.
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 1-2 and 4-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 1010122491 in view of CN 107652064, Adachi et al. (US 5,588,254; hereinafter, Adachi), and Patier et al. (hereinafter, Patier).
CN 101012249 discloses carrageenan oligosaccharides of the following structure, wherein n = 0-11 (claim 1):
PNG
media_image1.png
232
612
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Said oligosaccharides are prepared by reacting κ-carrageenan with acid in the presence of a reducing agent such as sodium borohydride (paragraph 10), which is referred to as a “reducing hydrolysis method,” which reduces the unstable terminal AnGal (see above) to the stable reduced form AnGal-OH (see above) (second section of paragraph 11). See also claims 2 and 3. See paragraph 19 for example of the preparation using acid and reducing agent, wherein the final product is separated by column chromatography, fractions combined and freeze-dried. Molecular weight range from 428.3 to 4918.8 daltons is disclosed (paragraph 19). κ-carrageenan hexatitol is disclosed in Figure 4 and Table 1 (paragraphs 22-24; Table 1 on page 6 of the original document; Figure 4 on page 6 of the original document). Use in health products or marine drugs is disclosed (last section of paragraph 11). Carrageenan oligosaccharides and their derivatives have been recognized as having good application prospects in antibacterial, antiviral, antitumor, anticoagulant, and antiulcer fields (paragraph 4).
CN 107652064 discloses the use of carrageenan oligosaccharides in a multifunctional biological pesticide and fertilizer that can control disease and pests, promote plant growth and yield, enhance plant immunity, and improve intrinsic quality of plants (translation paragraphs 6-7, 12, 15, 45). Enhanced stress resistance in plants is also disclosed (abstract; paragraph 14). The carrageenan oligosaccharides are used in a mixture with many other ingredients (paragraphs 7-8). See also claims 1-6.
Adachi (US 5,588,254) discloses a composition comprising decomposition products of polysaccharides such as carrageenan, which contain oligosaccharides as the main component (column 2, first paragraph) and accelerate growth of plants (column 1, lines 8-15). Accelerated growth provides improved yield, taste, and freshness of plants (see from column 13, line 65 to column 14, line 3). Adachi’s carrageenan oligosaccharides are decomposition product obtained by decomposing carrageenan from red algae such as Chondrus crispus; the decomposition product has a polymerization degree of from 2 to 10 (column 9, lines 1-10). The oligosaccharide is prepared by dissolving the carrageenan in water, acid-hydrolyzing with HCl solution, and then neutralizing the reaction mixture to provide the final product (Example 30; column 9, lines 11-21). Although the neutralization step is not explicitly disclosed using carrageenan as the starting polysaccharide, other acid-hydrolyzed polysaccharides are neutralized by sodium hydroxide. See e.g., paragraph bridging columns 2-3; column 6, lines 19-31; paragraph bridging columns 9-10; column 10, lines 49-55; column 11, lines 1-27. Radish plants in Adachi’s Example 30 showed increased stalk-leaf length and root length after being treated with carrageenan oligosaccharides diluted in a range from 0.25% to 0.0025% (columns 31-32, see Table 32 in particular).
Patier discloses that kappa-carrageenan oligosaccharides having different terminal residues elicit laminarinase activity in plants, which is a marker of defense metabolism in plants (pages 33-34, Discussion section). In particular, Patier discloses such activity of the following different kappa-carrageenan oligosaccharides:
(1) product obtained from enzymatic hydrolysis of kappa-carrageenan having the following structure, wherein n = 2-7, with n = 3 being most effective (page 28, including Figure 1A):
PNG
media_image2.png
162
560
media_image2.png
Greyscale
; and
(2) silica-bound kappa-carrageenan hexasaccharide derivative obtained from kappa-neocarrahexaose sulfate having the following structure (pages 28-29, including Figure 1B):
PNG
media_image3.png
176
762
media_image3.png
Greyscale
See in particular page 34, left column, last paragraph. Elicitation of laminarinase activity is retained when the reducing end of the oligosaccharide is reduced to open up the ring to make the sliica-bound derivative (see above structures and first sentence of the Discussion section on page 33).
The formulation of the instant claimed invention requires carrageenan oligosaccharides that read on the carrageenan oligosaccharides of CN 101012249. The “reducing hydrolysis method” of CN 101012249 is the same as the claim-recited “hydrolytic reduction.” The range of n = 0-11 disclosed by CN 101012249 encompasses disaccharide polyol, tetrasaccharide polyol, hexasaccharide polyol, and octasaccharide polyol when n = 0, 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Hexasaccharide polyol is specifically exemplified by CN 101012249 (Figure 4 and Table 1; paragraphs 22-24).
Claimed features that require further discussion are set forth below.
Formulation for maintaining osmotic balance in plants against abiotic stress (claim 1), such as hydric stress, drought, osmotic stress, thermal stress, light stress, nutrient stress, chemical stress generated by metallic or organic pollutants in the soil, salinity, extreme temperatures, water stress (claims 7-8)
CN 101012249 does not disclose its hydrolytically reduced carrageenan oligosaccharides for maintaining osmotic balance in plants against abiotic stress. However, carrageenan oligosaccharides are known to have many valuable uses, including use as an antibacterial, antiviral (CN 101012249), and use as a multifunctional pesticide and fertilizer that can control disease and pests, promote plant growth and yield, enhance plant immunity, enhanced stress resistance, and improve intrinsic quality of plants (CN 107652064). Acid hydrolyzed and neutralized carrageenan oligosaccharides are known to accelerate plant growth and improve yield, taste, and freshness of plants (Adachi). Further, Patier is evidence that carrageenan oligosaccharides can have structurally different terminal residues (reducing terminal residue, reduced terminal residue) while retaining their activity of eliciting plant defense.
Taken together, the prior art as a whole suggests that the hydrolytically reduced carrageenan oligosaccharides taught by CN 101012249 would be a useful ingredient in a formulation for improved plant growth.
Also, the ordinary skilled artisan would have recognized that most plants growing in the field would be exposed to some abiotic stress of the type recited in claims 7-8 because plants growing in the field can be exposed to extreme variations in temperature, precipitation, water supply, nutrient availability, and pollutants. CN 107652064 discloses the use of carrageenan oligosaccharides to enhance plant immunity and stress resistance. Therefore, a formulation of carrageenan oligosaccharides taught by CN 101012249 would necessarily possess the properties claimed in the instant invention claims.
Further, it is well established that “[m]ere recognition of latent properties in the prior art does not render nonobvious an otherwise known invention.” In re Baxter Travenol Labs, 21 USPQ2d 1281, 1285 (Fed. Cir. 1991). In Baxter, the court held that even when the prior art did not expressly disclose hemolysis-suppression feature or property of a blood bag plasticizer, such unrecognized feature or property is insufficient for rebutting a prima facie case of obviousness over a prior art blood bag that utilized the same plasticizer. Id. See also Ex parte Obiaya, 227 USPQ 58, 60 (Bd. Pat. App. & Int. 1985) (“The fact that appellant has recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious”).
At least one adjuvant ranging from 0.1-10%
The prior art as a whole suggests that the hydrolytically reduced carrageenan oligosaccharides taught by CN 101012249 would be a useful ingredient in a formulation for improved plant growth. It would have been obvious in the technology of cultivating plants for growth to incorporate one or more adjuvants of various concentration percentages for adjuvant functionalities such as surfactant, penetration, preservative, and other similar functionalities.
Formulation is “free of bio-actives”
This feature was previously discussed in that it contradicts the fact that the instant invention improves the overall health of plants. The specification definition of “bio-actives” is activity to improve the overall health of living organisms (paragraph 40), and specification Table 15 discloses the improved health of plants after treatment with the inventive formulation (paragraph 139). In other words, the claimed formulation cannot be free of bio-actives, or at the very least not bio-actives obtained from carrageenan. Moreover, there is no requirement in the prior art that the carrageenan oligosaccharides taught by CN 101012249 must be used with “bio-actives” as exemplified in the definition of specification paragraph 40: phytohormones, vitamins, amino acids, and betaines.
Heavy metals not more than 10 mg/kg
CN 101012249 does not disclose inclusion of heavy metals. None of the cited secondary references require heavy metals.
At least one carrageenan oligosaccharide derivative polyol has MW in the range
of 200-12,000 dalton
CN 101012249 discloses molecular weight range from 428.3 to 4918.8 daltons (paragraph 19). The exemplified κ-carrageenan hexatitol has a calculated MW of 1223.4 and theoretical MW of 1244.7 (paragraph 22).
Formulation is non-crystalline and stable at temperatures in the range of 1 °C to 60 °C
It is noted that Applicant’s carrageenan oligosaccharides can have MW in the range of 200 to 12,000 (see claim 1; specification paragraphs 13, 54, 111), which indicates that the claim-recited characteristics are possessed by carrageenan oligosaccharides of various degrees of polymerization.
Taken with the fact that carrageenan oligosaccharides of CN 101012249 include the same carrageenan oligosaccharides that are hydrolytically reduced disaccharide polyol, tetrasaccharide polyol, hexasaccharide polyol, and octasaccharide polyol, a formulation of these oligosaccharides would necessarily have the same properties as the claimed formulation because the oligosaccharides are the same.
Shelf life of at least three years
The ordinary skilled artisan would have found it obvious to add a suitable preservative to obtain preservative functionality and increased shelf life. Carrageenan oligosaccharides are known to be used with many other agricultural ingredients (CN 107652064), so the addition of a preservative to extend shelf life to at least three years would have been obvious when the formulation requires storage of at least three years.
Claim 5: formulation is water soluble, biodegradable, and supports the growth
of microorganisms
Carrageenan oligosaccharides of CN 101012249 include the same carrageenan oligosaccharides that are hydrolytically reduced disaccharide polyol, tetrasaccharide polyol, hexasaccharide polyol, and octasaccharide polyol. Therefore, the characteristics recited in claim 5 would be necessarily possessed by the carrageenan oligosaccharides taught by CN 101012249.
Claim 10: formulation is stable in a wide range of pH 2 to 12
Carrageenan oligosaccharides of CN 101012249 include the same carrageenan oligosaccharides that are hydrolytically reduced disaccharide polyol, tetrasaccharide polyol, hexasaccharide polyol, and octasaccharide polyol. Therefore, the characteristics recited in claim 10 would be necessarily possessed by carrageenan oligosaccharides taught by CN 101012249.
Therefore, the claimed invention, as a whole, would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, because every element of the invention and the claimed invention as a whole have been fairly disclosed or suggested by the teachings of the cited references.
To the extent that they are applicable, Applicant’s arguments filed on 11/19/2025 have been given due consideration but they were deemed unpersuasive.
Applicant argues that the claim-recited carrageenan oligosaccharide polyol is structurally distinct from the carrageenan oligosaccharides disclosed in the cited art. However, CN 101012249 clearly teaches carrageenan oligosaccharides having the same reduced alditol (alcohol) terminal residue via hydrolytic reduction.
Applicant argues that “Adachi teaches only acid hydrolysates of carrageenan, which possess reactive reducing ends.” However, CN 101012249 clearly teaches carrageenan oligosaccharides having the same reduced terminal residue via hydrolytic reduction, and secondary references by Adachi, CN 107652064, and Patier suggest the use of such carrageenan oligosaccharides in formulations for plant growth.
Applicant argues that Adachi and CN 107652064 (referred to as “Liu” by Applicant) do not disclose the constraint of being “free of bio-actives.” The Examiner cannot agree. It has already been discussed in this Office action that this claim feature contradicts the fact that the instant invention improves the overall health of plants. The specification definition of “bio-actives” is provided in paragraph 40, which is copied below with markings:
PNG
media_image4.png
110
508
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Such a broad definition includes water because water is released from myriad pathways and responses involving plants; and water is critical to health of plants. Said broad definition also includes the carrageenan oligosaccharides of claim 1, because they can be released by a plant as a byproduct of plant metabolism. Therefore, this is a claim feature that is not even met by Applicant’s own claims because it is an indefinite claim feature.
Additionally, neither Adachi nor CN 107652064 require phytohormones, vitamins, amino acids, betaines, nor other chemical compounds that could be synthesized or released by a living organism.
For these reasons, Applicant’s argument regarding the “free of bio-actives” feature is found unpersuasive.
For all of the reasons set forth in detail above, Applicant’s arguments are found unpersuasive, and all claims under examination must be rejected again.
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 JOHN PAK whose telephone number is (571)272-0620. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday from 8:30 AM to 5 PM.
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner's SPE, Fereydoun Sajjadi, can be reached on (571)272-3311. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571)273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/JOHN PAK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1699
1 Machine translation is provided herewith. All paragraph references are to the paragraph numbers of the translation document unless otherwise indicated.