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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 7 and 9-14, 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meng et al. (herein referred to as Meng, CN 110124580 A) in view of Zulin et al. (herein referred to as Zulin, WO 2007109761 A2), Liu et al. (herein referred to as Liu, CN 110100965 A) and Ali et al. (herein referred to as Ali, “Cinnamon: A Natural Feed Additive for Poultry Health and Production—A Review”).
With regard to Claim 7, Meng teaches a process for preparing a feed ingredient ([0002]) comprising preparing a core ([0013], [0016]). Meng teaches coating the core with a coating material ([0015]-[0017]) but Meng is silent to the coating material being an organic acid.
Zulin teaches a method for producing a palatability enhancer for a companion animal food product (abstract). Zulin teaches coating the animal feed product with a palatability enhancer such as citric acid ([0045], [0017]).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Meng in view of Zulin to use citric acid as a coating to enhance the palatability of the animal feed product.
With regard to the core, Meng is silent to the core being cinnamic aldehyde.
Liu teaches a multi-layer coated essential oil-organic acid compound feed additive ([0002]). Liu teaches the core includes plant essential oils ([0009]). Liu teaches the plant essential oils are plant extracts, which are aromatic volatile liquids with effects such as attracting appetite, promoting growth, inhibiting bacteria and inflammation, resisting stress, preventing and treating diseases, and preventing feed mold ([0004]). Liu teaches plant essential oils include cinnamon essential oil ([0009]). Liu teaches the essential oil includes components such as cinnamaldehyde ([0021]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify Meng in view of Liu to have use cinnamon essential oil, which contains cinnamaldehyde as the core material because it has effects such as attracting appetite, promoting growth, inhibiting bacteria and inflammation, resisting stress, preventing and treating diseases, and preventing feed mold.
However, the combination of Meng and Liu is silent to the feed ingredient containing at least 35% by weight of the cinnamic aldehyde.
Ali teaches the dietary supplementation of cinnamon in poultry feed as a natural feed additive has beneficial impacts on nutrient digestibility, hypocholesterolaemic, blood biochemical profile, gene expression, immunity, and particularly on gut health to alleviate the impact of disease and heat stress by maintaining water and electrolytic balance and feed intake. It is clearly demonstrated that cinnamon can be used as an alternative to antibiotics in the poultry industry offering greater animal health, food safety, and economic aspects of poultry production (Simple Summary).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Meng and Liu in view of Ali to include cinnamaldehyde at an amount greater than 35% of the core to achieve the desired beneficial impacts such as nutrient digestibility, hypocholesterolaemic, blood biochemical profile, gene expression, immunity, and particularly on gut health to alleviate the impact of disease and heat stress by maintaining water and electrolytic balance and feed intake. Additional one with ordinary skill in the art would recognize to utilize an amount which would act as an antibiotic. See MPEP 2144.05(II)(A) "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
With regard to Claim 9, Meng is silent to the acidic layer containing citric acid.
Zulin teaches a method for producing a palatability enhancer for a companion animal food product (abstract). Zulin teaches coating the animal feed product with a palatability enhancer such as citric acid ([0045], [0017]).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Liu in view of Zulin to use citric acid as a coating to enhance the palatability of the animal feed product.
With regard to Claims 10 and 11, Meng teaches the coating material comprises sodium carboxymethyl cellulose ([0055]). Meng teaches the coating liquid of the present invention adopts the above components to effectively wrap tea tree essential oil molecules, make them uniformly dispersed, and prevent the volatilization of the tea tree essential oil, thereby improving the stability of the tea tree essential oil and increasing its storage time ([0057]).
However, Meng is silent to the use of multiple coating layers.
Liu teaches a multi-layer coated essential oil and organic acid compound feed additive ([0009]). Liu teaches coating an acidic layer with a coating layer containing a polymer ([0009], Liu reads such that a coating layer containing ethyl cellulose). Liu teaches the additional layer of polymer coating buffers the destructive effect of gastric acid thereby avoiding problems such as the collapse of the mesh structure of the intestinal casing material, which would prevent the additive from reaching the intestine ([0025]).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify Meng in view of Liu to include an additional layer of polymer coating to buffer the destructive effect of gastric acid.
With regard to Claims 12 and 13, Meng teaches it is preferred that the drug-loaded pellet cores are placed in a coating pan or a fluidized bed, and the coating liquid is atomized by a spray gun to perform atomization coating ([0065]).
With regard to Claim 14, the combination of Meng, Zulin, Liu, and Ali teaches the limitations of the claimed invention, and the compositions are stable. Thus, one with ordinary skill in the art would reasonably deduce the composition taught by Meng, Zulin, Liu, and Ali would retain at least 85% of the cinnamic aldehyde for up to ninety days after combination with animal feed or raw ingredients. See MPEP 2112.01(I) which states Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).
With regard to Claims 21-23, Meng teaches a process for preparing a feed ingredient ([0002]) comprising preparing a core ([0013], [0016]). Meng teaches coating the core with methacrylic acid-ethyl acrylate copolymer ([0041]). One with ordinary skill in the art would recognize methacrylic acid-ethyl acrylate copolymer contains acidic functional groups but Meng is silent to the coating being an organic acid.
Zulin teaches a method for producing a palatability enhancer for a companion animal food product (abstract). Zulin teaches coating the animal feed product with a palatability enhancer such as citric acid ([0045], [0017]).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Meng in view of Zulin to use citric acid as a coating to enhance the palatability of the animal feed product.
With regard to the core, Meng is silent to the core being cinnamic aldehyde.
Liu teaches a multi-layer coated essential oil-organic acid compound feed additive ([0002]). Liu teaches the core includes plant essential oils ([0009]). Liu teaches the plant essential oils are plant extracts, which are aromatic volatile liquids with effects such as attracting appetite, promoting growth, inhibiting bacteria and inflammation, resisting stress, preventing and treating diseases, and preventing feed mold ([0004]). Liu teaches plant essential oils include cinnamon essential oil ([0009]). Liu teaches the essential oil includes components such as cinnamaldehyde ([0021]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify Meng in view of Liu to have use cinnamon essential oil, which contains cinnamaldehyde as the core material because it has effects such as attracting appetite, promoting growth, inhibiting bacteria and inflammation, resisting stress, preventing and treating diseases, and preventing feed mold.
However, the combination of Meng and Liu is silent to the feed ingredient containing at least 35% by weight of the cinnamic aldehyde.
Ali teaches the dietary supplementation of cinnamon in poultry feed as a natural feed additive has beneficial impacts on nutrient digestibility, hypocholesterolaemic, blood biochemical profile, gene expression, immunity, and particularly on gut health to alleviate the impact of disease and heat stress by maintaining water and electrolytic balance and feed intake. It is clearly demonstrated that cinnamon can be used as an alternative to antibiotics in the poultry industry offering greater animal health, food safety, and economic aspects of poultry production (Simple Summary).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Meng and Liu in view of Ali to include cinnamaldehyde at an amount greater than 35% of the core to achieve the desired beneficial impacts such as nutrient digestibility, hypocholesterolaemic, blood biochemical profile, gene expression, immunity, and particularly on gut health to alleviate the impact of disease and heat stress by maintaining water and electrolytic balance and feed intake. Additional one with ordinary skill in the art would recognize to utilize an amount which would act as an antibiotic. See MPEP 2144.05(II)(A) "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Meng teaches the coating material comprises sodium carboxymethyl cellulose ([0055]). Meng teaches the coating liquid of the present invention adopts the above components to effectively wrap tea tree essential oil molecules, make them uniformly dispersed, and prevent the volatilization of the tea tree essential oil, thereby improving the stability of the tea tree essential oil and increasing its storage time ([0057]).
However, Meng is silent to the use of multiple coating layers.
Liu teaches a multi-layer coated essential oil and organic acid compound feed additive ([0009]). Liu teaches coating an acidic layer with a coating layer containing a polymer ([0009], Liu reads such that a coating layer containing ethyl cellulose). Liu teaches the additional layer of polymer coating buffers the destructive effect of gastric acid thereby avoiding problems such as the collapse of the mesh structure of the intestinal casing material, which would prevent the additive from reaching the intestine ([0025]).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify Meng in view of Liu to include an additional layer of polymer coating to buffer the destructive effect of gastric acid.
With regard to Claim 24, Meng teaches the coating material comprises sodium carboxymethyl cellulose ([0055]). Meng teaches the coating liquid of the present invention adopts the above components to effectively wrap tea tree essential oil molecules, make them uniformly dispersed, and prevent the volatilization of the tea tree essential oil, thereby improving the stability of the tea tree essential oil and increasing its storage time ([0057]).
However, Meng is silent to the use of multiple coating layers.
Liu teaches a multi-layer coated essential oil and organic acid compound feed additive ([0009]). Liu teaches coating an acidic layer with a coating layer containing a polymer ([0009], Liu reads such that a coating layer containing ethyl cellulose). Liu teaches the additional layer of polymer coating buffers the destructive effect of gastric acid thereby avoiding problems such as the collapse of the mesh structure of the intestinal casing material, which would prevent the additive from reaching the intestine ([0025]).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify Meng in view of Liu to include an additional layer of polymer coating to buffer the destructive effect of gastric acid.
With regard to Claims 25 and 26, Meng teaches it is preferred that the drug-loaded pellet cores are placed in a coating pan or a fluidized bed, and the coating liquid is atomized by a spray gun to perform atomization coating ([0065]).
With regard to Claim 27, the combination of Meng, Zulin, Liu, and Ali teaches the limitations of the claimed invention and the compositions are stable. Thus, one with ordinary skill in the art would reasonably deduce the composition taught by Meng, Zulin, Liu, and Ali would retain at least 85% of the cinnamic aldehyde for up to ninety days after combination with animal feed or raw ingredients. See MPEP 2112.01(I) which states Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 10 June 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 7, 9, and 14 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Meng (CN 110124580 A), Zulin (WO 2007109761 A2), Liu (CN 110100965 A) and Ali (“Cinnamon: A Natural Feed Additive for Poultry Health and Production—A Review”).
First, with regard to applicant’s argument in view of Liu, applicants arguments were deemed persuasive. However, Liu is no longer relied upon to teach the coating carrier as claimed. Meng is now relied on up to teach the coating carrier. Specifically, Meng teaches a process for preparing a feed ingredient ([0002]) comprising preparing a core ([0013], [0016]). Meng teaches coating the core with a coating material ([0015]-[0017]). Thus, applicant’s arguments with regard to Liu teaching the “coating carrier” are moot.
Similar to as discussed above, applicant’s arguments with regard to Liu teaching the use of tannic acid as an organic acid coating material are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection. In this case, Zulin is relied upon to teach the organic acid coating. Zulin teaches coating the animal feed product with a palatability enhancer such as citric acid ([0045], [0017]). Thus, Zulin teaches the claimed limitation as well as ample motivation to combine with Meng.
Further, Applicant argues that Meng does not teach or suggest a multi-layer coating as claims. This argument is not found to be persuasive because Meng teaches coating a core with a coating material ([0015]-[0017]). With the coating specifically, Liu is relied upon to teach the use of multiple layer coatings. Liu clearly teaches a multi-layer coating (title, abstract, [0009]), the reference specifically uses the phrase “multi-layer coated” and provides ample motivation to combine such as to buffer the destructive effect of gastric acid ([0025]). Thus, applicant’s argument is not found to be persuasive.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KARLA I DIVIESTI whose telephone number is (571)270-0787. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7am-3pm (MST).
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, Erik Kashnikow can be reached at (571) 270-3475. 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.
/K.I.D./Examiner, Art Unit 1792
/ERIK KASHNIKOW/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1792
Prosecution Insights