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
Claims 1, 6, 31, 34, 36 and 38 are pending.
WITHDRAWN OBJECTIONS
All objections of record in the Office Action mailed 11/18/2025 have been withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendments in the Paper filed 6/22/2026.
WITHDRAWN REJECTIONS
All rejections of record in the Office Action mailed 11/18/2025 have been withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendments in the Paper filed 6/22/2026.
NEW OBJECTIONS
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Official Correspondence.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required:
The phrases
“the amount of oleic acid … monoacylglyceride” in claim 1, lines 6-11,
“about 5% … triacylglyceride form” in claim 34, line 13
“the amount of oleic acid … monoacylglyceride” in claim 34, lines 6-10,
“about 5% … triacylglyceride form” in claim 34, line 12 and
“about 5% diacylglyceride form in claim 38, lines 2-3
are not described in the text of the Specification. Applicant is advised to consider amending the text of the Specification to incorporate this language while being careful not to add new matter.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: the term “esterfied” in line 10 is a typo and should state “esterified”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: the term “esterfied” in line 13 is a typo and should state “esterified”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 34 is objected to because of the following informalities: the term “esterfied” in line 10 is a typo and should state “esterified”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 34 is objected to because of the following informalities: the term “esterfied” in line 12 is a typo and should state “esterified”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 38 is objected to because of the following informalities: the term “esterfied” in line 3 is a typo and should state “esterified”. Appropriate correction is required.
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, 6, 31, 34, 36 and 38 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 “about 30% or more of the fatty acid content is esterfied in monoacylglyceride form” in claim 1, lines 10-11 is new matter.
Fatty acids, like oleic acid, are NOT esters.
PNG
media_image1.png
148
606
media_image1.png
Greyscale
A monoacylglyceride (or monoglyceride) is an ester, not an acid.
PNG
media_image2.png
136
682
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Paragraph [00106] of the Specification refers to “MAG content” and not “fatty acid content”.
PNG
media_image3.png
58
636
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Paragraph [00106] may provide support for MAG content but not fatty acid content.
The phrase “about 5% or less of the fatty acid content is esterfied in triacylglyceride form” in claim 1, line 13 is new matter.
Fatty acids, like oleic acid, are NOT esters.
PNG
media_image1.png
148
606
media_image1.png
Greyscale
A triacylglyceride (or triglyceride) is an ester, not an acid.
PNG
media_image4.png
470
326
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Paragraph [0015] of the Specification refers to “TAG content” and not “fatty acid content”.
PNG
media_image5.png
244
634
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Paragraph [0015] may provide support for TAG content but not fatty acid content.
The phrase “about 50% or more of the fatty acid content is esterfied in monoacylglyceride form” in claim 34, lines 10-11 is new matter.
Fatty acids, like oleic acid, are NOT esters.
PNG
media_image1.png
148
606
media_image1.png
Greyscale
A monoacylglyceride (or monoglyceride) is an ester, not an acid.
PNG
media_image2.png
136
682
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Paragraph [00106] of the Specification refers to “MAG content” and not “fatty acid content”.
PNG
media_image3.png
58
636
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Paragraph [00106] may provide support for MAG content but not fatty acid content.
The phrase “about 5% to about 30% by weight of the fatty acid content is esterfied in diacylglyceride form” in claim 38, lines 2-3 is new matter.
Fatty acids, like oleic acid, are NOT esters.
PNG
media_image1.png
148
606
media_image1.png
Greyscale
A diacylglyceride (or diglyceride) is an ester, not an acid.
PNG
media_image6.png
156
618
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Paragraph [00107] of the Specification refers to “DAG content” and not “fatty acid content”.
PNG
media_image7.png
86
624
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Paragraph [00107] may provide support for DAG content but not fatty acid content.
The phrase “about 5% or less of the fatty acid content is esterfied in triacylglyceride form” in claim 34, line 12 is new matter.
Fatty acids, like oleic acid, are NOT esters.
PNG
media_image1.png
148
606
media_image1.png
Greyscale
A triacylglyceride (or triglyceride) is an ester, not an acid.
PNG
media_image4.png
470
326
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Paragraph [0015] of the Specification refers to “TAG content” and not “fatty acid content”.
PNG
media_image5.png
244
634
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Paragraph [0015] may provide support for TAG content but not fatty acid content.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1, 6, 31 and 34, 36 and 38 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 “30%” in claim 1, line 10 is vague and indefinite as it is unclear whether the % is by weight, volume, mole or something else.
The phrase “30%” in claim 1, line 10 is vague and indefinite as it is unclear whether the % includes the terminal “H” in the acid (like with oleic acid) or is the terminal “H” not included like with MAGS.
PNG
media_image1.png
148
606
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
136
682
media_image2.png
Greyscale
The phrase “5%” in claim 1, line 12 is vague and indefinite as it is unclear whether the % is by weight, volume, mole or something else.
The phrase “5%” in claim 1, line 13 is vague and indefinite as it is unclear whether the % is by weight, volume, mole or something else.
The phrase “5%” in claim 1, line 13 is vague and indefinite as it is unclear whether the % includes the terminal “H” in the acid (like with oleic acid) or is the terminal “H” not included like with TAGS.
PNG
media_image1.png
148
606
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
470
326
media_image4.png
Greyscale
The phrase “tocopherols naturally present in the processed oil” in Claim 1, lines 19-20 is vague and indefinite it is unclear how tocopherols can be naturally present in “processed oil” as the processed oil is not canola seeds. Canola seeds naturally contain tocopherols, however, processed oil is a product made by humans and not natural.
PNG
media_image8.png
224
236
media_image8.png
Greyscale
The phrase “tocopherols naturally present in the processed oil” in Claim 1, lines 19-20 is vague and indefinite it is unclear how one can determine whether the tocopherols are naturally present or added as the tocopherols are identical no matter the source.
The phrase “1% to about 2%” in claim 34, lines 8-9 is vague and indefinite as it is unclear whether the % is by weight, volume, mole or something else.
The phrase “50%” in claim 34, line 10 is vague and indefinite as it is unclear whether the % is by weight, volume, mole or something else.
The phrase “50%” in claim 34, line 10 is vague and indefinite as it is unclear whether the % includes the terminal “H” in the acid (like with oleic acid) or is the terminal “H” not included like with MAGS.
PNG
media_image1.png
148
606
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
136
682
media_image2.png
Greyscale
The phrase “5%” in claim 34, line 12 is vague and indefinite as it is unclear whether the % is by weight, volume, mole or something else.
The phrase “5%” in claim 34, line 12 is vague and indefinite as it is unclear whether the % includes the terminal “H” in the acid (like with oleic acid) or is the terminal “H” not included like with TAGS.
PNG
media_image1.png
148
606
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
470
326
media_image4.png
Greyscale
The phrase “tocopherols naturally present in the processed oil” in Claim 34, lines 18-19 is vague and indefinite it is unclear how tocopherols can be naturally present in “processed oil” as the processed oil is not canola seeds. Canola seeds naturally contain tocopherols, however, processed oil is a product made by humans and not natural.
PNG
media_image8.png
224
236
media_image8.png
Greyscale
The phrase “tocopherols naturally present in the processed oil” in Claim 34, lines 18-19 is vague and indefinite it is unclear how one can determine whether the tocopherols are naturally present or added as the tocopherols are identical no matter the source.
The phrase “5% to about 30%” in claim 38, line 2 is vague and indefinite as it is unclear whether the % includes the terminal “H” in the acid (like with oleic acid) or is the terminal “H” not included like with DAGS.
PNG
media_image1.png
148
606
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
156
618
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Clarification and/or correction required.
ANSWERS TO APPLICANT’S ARGUMENTS
The limitations of the amended/new claims are discussed above.
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.
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
June 26, 2026
Prosecution Insights