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 .
This office action was written in response to the Applicants Remarks filed 11/25/25.
Claims 1-8 are pending. Claims 4-7 have been examined on the merits. Claims 1-3, and 8 have been withdrawn.
Withdrawn Rejections
The 112 2nd rejection of claim 7 has been withdrawn regarding the specific issue discussed. However, claim 7 has been rejected
The 103(a) rejections of claims 4, 5, and 7 over Yang et al. CN 106036040 in view of Jia et al. CN 102524518 and Salmons et al. US 20160298077 have been withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 6 lacks the indefinite article “a” before the word “composite” in line 7. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 6-7 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.
Claim 6 is indefinite because it recites activating various strains. It is not clear if Applicants are referring to the mixed strain solution or a different set of strains. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 is indefinite because it is not clear what is meant by “S1” and “S2”. Appropriate correction is required. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the culture solution" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the composite culture medium" in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 is indefinite because it is not clear where the multiplication medium is added in the method. Applicants recite mixing the strains for multiplication culture and then centrifuging the culture solution and performing resuspension with physiological saline. However, there is no mention of an active step of using a multiplication medium. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 is indefinite because Applicants recite a multiplication medium that is a composite medium of Jerusalem artichoke and Poria cocos and then later refer to the medium containing Jerusalem artichoke and Poria cocos as a composite culture medium. Applicants appear to give the medium containing Jerusalem artichoke and Poria cocos, multiple names and the reference back to the differently named mediums is further confusing. Is it a “multiplication medium”, a “composite medium”, or a “composite culture medium”? Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the prefreezing process" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the strain solution" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The limitation should read “the mixed strain solution”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 recites “a setting procedure of diaphragm temperature”. This is grammatically confusing and it further appears to refer to an apparatus limitation. It is not clear was the diaphragm is referring to in the claim. The claims are to a method and referring to parts of the freeze-drying apparatus without providing context on how it fits into the method is confusing. It is not clear what a diaphragm is. Is it the body of the apparatus where the strain solution is held? The claim may be better served by removing the reference to the setting procedure. The claim may be better served by stating that “the frozen mixed strain solution is first heated at 10°C for 2 hours, then heated up to 20°C for 3 hours, and finally heated up to 30°C; for a total duration of the entire freeze-drying process being 20 hours”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 recites “the freeze-drying conditions are vacuum degree 10 Pa and cold trap temperature of -55°C”. This appears to refer to pressure exerted during the freeze-drying process and there is also a grammatical issue. The claim should be amended to recite “the freeze-drying conditions comprise a vacuum pressure of 10 Pa and a cold trap temperature of -55°C”.
Claim 7 recites that the entire freeze-drying process takes 20 hours. It is not clear if this includes the pre-freezing process. Further calling the final heating step a “heating up to 30C for continuous heating” is not congruous with heating such that that the total freeze drying step is a 20 hour process. Continuous heating does not connote an end point i.e. 20 hours. Appropriate correction is required.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claims 4 and 5 are allowable over the prior art of record there being no disclosure of culturing the mixture of bacteria of Enterococcus faecalis, Candida utilis, Aspergillus niger, Bacillus coagulans and Brevibacillus laterosporus and freeze drying with a protective agent consisting of Poria cocos polysaccharide extract 10.0-30.0 g/100 mL, Atractylodes macrocephala polysaccharide extract 10.0-20.0 g/100 mL, Radix codonopsis polysaccharide extract 5.0-20.0 g/100 mL, L-tyrosine 2.0- 10.0 g/100 mL, α-cyclodextrin 2.0-7.0 g/100 mL and polyethyleneimine 2.0-5.0 g/100 mL in a volume ratio of 1:1 to 1:4.
Response to Arguments
The 112 2nd rejection of claim 7 has been withdrawn regarding the specific issue discussed. But has been newly rejected as discussed above.
The 103(a) rejections of claims 4, 5, and 7 over Yang et al. CN 106036040 in view of Jia et al. CN 102524518 and Salmons et al. US 20160298077 have been withdrawn.
Conclusion
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 FELICIA C TURNER whose telephone number is (571)270-3733. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu 8:00-4:00 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.
/Felicia C Turner/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1793