DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Applicant's election without traverse of Invention I, and the following species in the reply filed on 05/29/2026 is acknowledged:
1. "citrus" in claim 27;
2. "dried state biomass" in claim 28;
3. "(iii) The pH of the suspension is between pH = 0.5 and pH = 4.0" in claim 30;
4. "(i) The separation is carried out as a single-stage or multi-stage separation" in
claim 31;
5. "(i) A cation exchanger material is used that is either implemented in a batch
process or a column process" in claim 32; and
6. "(ii) The aqueous solution contains pectin methyl esterase in a total activity of from
100 to 10000 units/L" in claim 33.
Claims 22-26 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 19, 20, 27-43 and the above elected species are under consideration in this Office Action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102(pre-AIA )
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in the United States.
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 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.
. Claims 19, 20, 27-43 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by WO0058367 (10/05/2000; IDS filed 04/03/2023).
The claims are product-by-process claims encompassing any pectin having any structure and biological activities, which is not limited by and not defined by the recited method steps used to produce the claimed pectin because according to MPEP § 2113:
“[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed.Cir. 1985) (citations omitted)”
WO0058367 (10/05/2000; IDS filed 04/03/2023) teaches pectin having a degree of blockiness of at least about 10 %, a degree of esterification of at least about 55 %, and a ΔCS of no more than about 100 centipoise; treatment of a pectin extract with rheozyme with 30 litres each being treated to a degree of esterification of 28.6%, 31.2% and 29.8%; comestible composition containing such a pectin; and a method of increasing the storage stability of a comestible composition by formulating the composition with such a pectin (see entire publication and claims especially claims 1-29). Hence, the pectin taught by WO0058367 reads on the claims, is encompassed by the claims, and thus anticipates the claimed invention.
Claims 19, 20, 27-43 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by US Patent 6699977 (2004-03-02; PTO 892).
The claims are product-by-process claims encompassing any pectin having any structure and biological activities, which is not limited by and not defined by the recited method steps used to produce the claimed pectin because according to MPEP § 2113:
“[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed.Cir. 1985) (citations omitted)”
US Patent 6699977 teaches low methoxyl pectins, processes thereof, and stabilized aqueous systems comprising the same, where the said low methoxyl pectins display pseudoplasticity and substantially no phase separation in aqueous solutions comprising at least one polyvalent cation (see entire patent, abstract and claims). US Patent 6699977 teaches the following in the claims:
1. A low methoxyl pectin having a degree of esterification of from about 20% to 50% and displaying pseudoplasticity and substantially no phase separation in aqueous solution comprising at least one polyvalent cation.
2. The low methoxyl pectin of claim 1, wherein the amount of polyvalent cation is from about 10 ppm to about 1,000 ppm, and wherein the polyvalent cation is selected from one of aluminum ions, iron ions, magnesium ions, calcium ions, or manganese ions.
3. The low methoxyl pectin of claim 2, wherein the polyvalent cation is calcium ion, and wherein the amount of calcium ion is from about 50 ppm to about 500 ppm.
4. The low methoxyl pectin of claim 3, wherein the amount of calcium ion is from about 200 ppm to about 300 ppm.
5. The low methoxyl pectin of claim 2, wherein the amount of phase separation in the aqueous solution is at most about 10%.
6. The low methoxyl pectin of claim 5, wherein the amount of phase separation in the aqueous solution is at most about 3%.
7. A low methoxyl pectin having a degree of esterification of from about 20% to 50% and displaying pseudoplasticity and substantially no particle sedimentation in aqueous solution comprising at least one polyvalent cation,
wherein the polyvalent cation is selected from one of aluminum ions, iron ions, magnesium ions, calcium ions, or manganese ions,
wherein the amount of polyvalent cation is from about 10 ppm to about 1,000 ppm, and wherein the amount of particle sedimentation in the aqueous solution is at most about 10%.
8. The low methoxyl pectin of claim 7 wherein the polyvalent cation is calcium ion in the amount of from about 20 ppm to about 300 ppm, and wherein the amount of particle sedimentation in the aqueous solution is at most about 3%.
9. The low methoxyl pectin of claim 1 having a degree of esterification from about 24% to 40%.
10. The low methoxyl pectin of claim 1 having a molecular weight from about 60 to 150 kDalton.
11. The low methoxyl pectin of claim 10 having a molecular weight from about 80 to 100 kDalton.
40. A process for preparing a low methoxyl pectin having a degree of esterification of from about 20% to 50% and displaying pseudoplasticity and substantially no particle sedimentation in aqueous solution which comprises treating a pectin starting material having a degree of esterification of greater than about 60% to obtain at least a non-calcium sensitive pectin fraction,
wherein the aqueous solution comprises at least one polyvalent cation selected from one of aluminum ions, iron ions, magnesium ions, calcium ions, or manganese ions,
wherein the amount of polyvalent cation is from about 10 ppm to about 1,000 ppm, and wherein the amount of particle sedimentation in the aqueous solution is at most about 10%.
41. The process of claim 40 wherein the polyvalent cation is calcium ion in the amount of from about 20 ppm to about 300 ppm, and wherein the amount of particle sedimentation in the aqueous solution is at most about 3%.
42. The process of claim 34 wherein the non-calcium sensitive pectin is prepared by treating a pectin starting material having a degree of esterification of greater than about 60% with a cation-containing preparation and an enzyme to obtain the non-calcium sensitive pectin fraction.
43. The process of claim 34 wherein the non-calcium sensitive pectin is prepared by (a) treating a pectin starting material having a degree of esterification of greater than about 60% with an enzyme; or (b) reesterifying the calcium sensitive pectin fraction to obtain the non-calcium sensitive pectin fraction.
44. The process of claim 34 wherein the non-calcium sensitive pectin is prepared by:
(a) treating a pectin starting material having a degree of esterification of greater than about 60% with a cation-containing preparation to obtain at least a non-calcium sensitive pectin fraction and a calcium sensitive pectin fraction;
(b) separating the non-calcium sensitive pectin fraction from the calcium sensitive pectin fraction; and
(c) deesterifying or deesterifying and amidating the non-calcium sensitive pectin fraction to obtain the low methoxyl pectin.
45. The process of claim 34 wherein the pectin starting material has a degree of esterification which is at least about 60%.
46. The process of claim 45 wherein the pectin starting material has a degree of esterification which is at least about 70%.
47. The process of claim 45 wherein the pectin starting material is obtained from at least one of citrus peels, apple juices, apple ciders, apple pomace, sugar beets, sunflower heads, vegetables or waste products from plants selected from at least one of apples, sugar beet, sunflower and citrus fruits.
48. The process of claim 47 wherein the pectin starting material is obtained from at least one of limes, lemons, grapefruits, and oranges.
49. The process of claim 44 prepared by deesterifying or deesterifying and amidating a non-calcium sensitive pectin to obtain the low methoxyl pectin.
50. The process of claim 49 prepared by deesterifying a non-calcium sensitive pectin to obtain the low methoxyl pectin.
70. A process for stabilizing insoluble components in an aqueous system which comprises adding a low methoxyl pectin to an aqueous system, wherein the low methoxyl pectin has a degree of esterification of from about 20% to 50% and displays pseudoplasticity and substantially no phase separation in aqueous solution, and wherein the aqueous solution comprises at least one polyvalent cation.
104. The process of claim 70 wherein the non-calcium sensitive pectin is prepared by the steps which comprise:
(a) treating a pectin starting material having a degree of esterification of greater than about 60% with a cation-containing preparation to obtain at least a non-calcium sensitive pectin fraction and a calcium sensitive pectin fraction;
(b) separating the non-calcium sensitive pectin fraction from the calcium sensitive pectin fraction; and
(c) deesterifying or deesterifying and amidating the non-calcium sensitive pectin fraction to obtain the low methoxyl pectin.
Hence, the pectin taught by US Patent 6699977 reads on the claims, is encompassed by the claims, and thus anticipates the claimed invention.
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 of this title, 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.
Claims 19, 20, 27-43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent 6699977 (2004-03-02; PTO 892), in view of US20200392257A1 (2020-12-17; PTO 892)
WO0058367 (10/05/2000; IDS filed 04/03/2023).
The claims are product-by-process claims encompassing any pectin having any structure and biological activities, which is not limited by and not defined by the recited method steps used to produce the claimed pectin because according to MPEP § 2113:
“[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed.Cir. 1985) (citations omitted)”
US Patent 6699977 teaches low methoxyl pectins, processes thereof, and stabilized aqueous systems comprising the same, where the said low methoxyl pectins display pseudoplasticity and substantially no phase separation in aqueous solutions comprising at least one polyvalent cation (see entire patent, abstract and claims). US Patent 6699977 teaches the following in the claims:
1. A low methoxyl pectin having a degree of esterification of from about 20% to 50% and displaying pseudoplasticity and substantially no phase separation in aqueous solution comprising at least one polyvalent cation.
2. The low methoxyl pectin of claim 1, wherein the amount of polyvalent cation is from about 10 ppm to about 1,000 ppm, and wherein the polyvalent cation is selected from one of aluminum ions, iron ions, magnesium ions, calcium ions, or manganese ions.
3. The low methoxyl pectin of claim 2, wherein the polyvalent cation is calcium ion, and wherein the amount of calcium ion is from about 50 ppm to about 500 ppm.
4. The low methoxyl pectin of claim 3, wherein the amount of calcium ion is from about 200 ppm to about 300 ppm.
5. The low methoxyl pectin of claim 2, wherein the amount of phase separation in the aqueous solution is at most about 10%.
6. The low methoxyl pectin of claim 5, wherein the amount of phase separation in the aqueous solution is at most about 3%.
7. A low methoxyl pectin having a degree of esterification of from about 20% to 50% and displaying pseudoplasticity and substantially no particle sedimentation in aqueous solution comprising at least one polyvalent cation,
wherein the polyvalent cation is selected from one of aluminum ions, iron ions, magnesium ions, calcium ions, or manganese ions,
wherein the amount of polyvalent cation is from about 10 ppm to about 1,000 ppm, and wherein the amount of particle sedimentation in the aqueous solution is at most about 10%.
8. The low methoxyl pectin of claim 7 wherein the polyvalent cation is calcium ion in the amount of from about 20 ppm to about 300 ppm, and wherein the amount of particle sedimentation in the aqueous solution is at most about 3%.
9. The low methoxyl pectin of claim 1 having a degree of esterification from about 24% to 40%.
10. The low methoxyl pectin of claim 1 having a molecular weight from about 60 to 150 kDalton.
11. The low methoxyl pectin of claim 10 having a molecular weight from about 80 to 100 kDalton.
40. A process for preparing a low methoxyl pectin having a degree of esterification of from about 20% to 50% and displaying pseudoplasticity and substantially no particle sedimentation in aqueous solution which comprises treating a pectin starting material having a degree of esterification of greater than about 60% to obtain at least a non-calcium sensitive pectin fraction,
wherein the aqueous solution comprises at least one polyvalent cation selected from one of aluminum ions, iron ions, magnesium ions, calcium ions, or manganese ions,
wherein the amount of polyvalent cation is from about 10 ppm to about 1,000 ppm, and wherein the amount of particle sedimentation in the aqueous solution is at most about 10%.
41. The process of claim 40 wherein the polyvalent cation is calcium ion in the amount of from about 20 ppm to about 300 ppm, and wherein the amount of particle sedimentation in the aqueous solution is at most about 3%.
42. The process of claim 34 wherein the non-calcium sensitive pectin is prepared by treating a pectin starting material having a degree of esterification of greater than about 60% with a cation-containing preparation and an enzyme to obtain the non-calcium sensitive pectin fraction.
43. The process of claim 34 wherein the non-calcium sensitive pectin is prepared by (a) treating a pectin starting material having a degree of esterification of greater than about 60% with an enzyme; or (b) reesterifying the calcium sensitive pectin fraction to obtain the non-calcium sensitive pectin fraction.
44. The process of claim 34 wherein the non-calcium sensitive pectin is prepared by:
(a) treating a pectin starting material having a degree of esterification of greater than about 60% with a cation-containing preparation to obtain at least a non-calcium sensitive pectin fraction and a calcium sensitive pectin fraction;
(b) separating the non-calcium sensitive pectin fraction from the calcium sensitive pectin fraction; and
(c) deesterifying or deesterifying and amidating the non-calcium sensitive pectin fraction to obtain the low methoxyl pectin.
45. The process of claim 34 wherein the pectin starting material has a degree of esterification which is at least about 60%.
46. The process of claim 45 wherein the pectin starting material has a degree of esterification which is at least about 70%.
47. The process of claim 45 wherein the pectin starting material is obtained from at least one of citrus peels, apple juices, apple ciders, apple pomace, sugar beets, sunflower heads, vegetables or waste products from plants selected from at least one of apples, sugar beet, sunflower and citrus fruits.
48. The process of claim 47 wherein the pectin starting material is obtained from at least one of limes, lemons, grapefruits, and oranges.
49. The process of claim 44 prepared by deesterifying or deesterifying and amidating a non-calcium sensitive pectin to obtain the low methoxyl pectin.
50. The process of claim 49 prepared by deesterifying a non-calcium sensitive pectin to obtain the low methoxyl pectin.
70. A process for stabilizing insoluble components in an aqueous system which comprises adding a low methoxyl pectin to an aqueous system, wherein the low methoxyl pectin has a degree of esterification of from about 20% to 50% and displays pseudoplasticity and substantially no phase separation in aqueous solution, and wherein the aqueous solution comprises at least one polyvalent cation.
104. The process of claim 70 wherein the non-calcium sensitive pectin is prepared by the steps which comprise:
(a) treating a pectin starting material having a degree of esterification of greater than about 60% with a cation-containing preparation to obtain at least a non-calcium sensitive pectin fraction and a calcium sensitive pectin fraction;
(b) separating the non-calcium sensitive pectin fraction from the calcium sensitive pectin fraction; and
(c) deesterifying or deesterifying and amidating the non-calcium sensitive pectin fraction to obtain the low methoxyl pectin.
The teachings of the reference differ from the claims in that the reference does not teach the recited method steps for making the Low methoxyl pectin.
US20200392257A1 teaches citrus pectin characterized by a low degree of methyl esterification yet a high intrinsic viscosity, a process for producing pectin using citrus peel and use of an esterase enzyme endogenous to citrus peel to produce pectin (see entire publication and claims especially paragraphs [0007]- [0042], [0136]- [0145]). US20200392257A1 teaches the following in the claims:
19. A de-esterification process comprising:
incubating a citrus peel in a solution comprising (a) a buffer, wherein the buffer maintains the pH of the solution containing the citrus peel at a pH in a range from 5 to 8, and (b) a calcium binder,
to produce a pectin having a degree of methyl esterification of 30 or less and an intrinsic viscosity of 5 dl/g or more.
20. The process of claim 19, wherein a concentration of the buffer is at least 0.02M.
21. The process of claim 19, wherein the incubating step is conducted at a temperature in a range from 55° C. to 75° C.
22. The process of claim 19, wherein the incubating step is conducted at a temperature in a range from 59° C. to 65° C.
23. The process of claim 19, wherein the calcium binder of (b) is also the buffer of (a).
24. The process of claim 19, wherein the calcium binder comprises:
a) Na2H-Citrate;
b) Na3-Citrate;
c) Na2H-phosphate;
d) Na3-phosphate; or
any combination thereof.
25. The process of claim 19, wherein the calcium binder comprises cation exchange beads.
26. The process of claim 19, wherein the incubation step is conducted for at least 30 minutes.
27. The process of claim 19, wherein the citrus peel comprises orange peel, lemon peel, grapefruit peel, lime peel, or a combination thereof.
WO0058367 teaches pectin having a degree of blockiness of at least about 10 %, a degree of esterification of at least about 55 %, and a ΔCS of no more than about 100 centipoise; treatment of a pectin extract with rheozyme with 30 litres each being treated to a degree of esterification of 28.6%, 31.2% and 29.8%; comestible composition containing such a pectin; and a method of increasing the storage stability of a comestible composition by formulating the composition with such a pectin (see entire publication and claims especially claims 1-29). WO0058367 teaches the following in the claims:
30. A process for making a pectin, said process comprising the step of treating a starting pectin having a degree of blockiness of at least about 10%, a degree of esterification of at least about 55%, and a ΔCS of greater than about 0 centipoise, with a pectin lyase under conditions sufficient to produce a processed pectin having a ΔCS that is lower than the ΔCS of said starting pectin.
31. The process of claim 30, wherein said starting pectin has a degree of blockiness of at least about 20%).
32. The process of claim 30, wherein said starting pectin has a degree of blockiness of no more than about 30%.
33. The process of claim 32, wherein said starting pectin has a degree of blockiness of between about 15% and about 25%.
34. The process of claim 30, wherein said starting pectin has a degree of esterification of at least about 55%o.
35. The process of claim 34, wherein said starting pectin has a degree of esterification of at least about 70%).
36. The process of claim 35, wherein said starting pectin has a degree of esterification of at least about 80%.
37. The process of claim 30, wherein said starting pectin has a degree of esterification of between about 55%> and about 80%.
38. The process of claim 37, wherein said starting pectin has a degree of esterification of between about 60% and about 72%.
39. The process of claim 30, wherein said starting pectin has a ΔCS of at least about 20.
40. The process of claim 39, wherein said starting pectin has a ΔCS of at least about 200.
41. The process of claim 40, wherein said starting pectin has a ΔCS of at least about 300.
42. The process of claim 42, wherein said starting pectin has a ΔCS of at least about 500.
43. The process of claim 30, wherein said processed pectin has a ΔCS of no more than about 20 centipoise.
44. The process of claim 43, wherein said processed pectin has a ΔCS of no more than about 10 centipoise.
45. The process of claim 44, wherein said processed pectin has a ΔCS of no more than about 5 centipoise.
46. The process of claim 45, wherein said processed pectin has a ΔCS of about 0 centipoise.
47. The process of claim 30, wherein said processed pectin has a ΔCS of between about 0 centipoise and about 20 centipoise.
48. The process of claim 47, wherein said processed pectin has a ΔCS of between about 0 centipoise and about 10 centipoise.
49. The process of claim 30, wherein said starting pectin has a molecular weight of no more than about 240,000.
50. The process of claim 49, wherein said starting pectin has a molecular weight of no more than about 150,000.
51. The process of claim 49, wherein said starting pectin has a molecular weight of at least about 100,000.
52. Pectin made by the process of claim 30.
53. A process for making a pectin, said process comprising the steps of a) treating a pectin having a degree of blockiness of at least about 10%, a degree of esterification of at least about 70%, and a ΔCS of greater than about 0 centipoise with plant pectin methylesterase under conditions sufficient to produce a de-esterified pectin having a degree of blockiness of at least about 10%, a degree of esterification of at least about 55%», and a ΔCS of greater than about 0; and b) treating said de-esterified pectin with a pectin lyase under conditions sufficient to produce a pectin having a degree of blockiness of at least about 10% and a ΔCS of no more than about 20 centipoise.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify and/or combine the reference teachings to make the claimed invention by combining the method steps taught by US20200392257A1 and WO0058367 with the method steps of US Patent 6699977 to obtain the claimed low methoxyl pectin. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to do this in order to obtain a low methoxyl pectin which can be used for food, pharmaceutical, personal care, household, and consumer products. It would have been obvious to include any of the method steps recited in the claims as routine optimization and/or as desired in order to obtain the low methoxyl pectin. One of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made would have a reasonable expectation of success because obtaining low methoxyl pectin are known in the art as shown by the above reference teachings. Hence, the claimed invention as a whole is prima facie obvious.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
. Claims 19, 20, 27-43 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-29 of copending Application No. 18040429, claims 1-29 of copending Application No. 18040421, claims 1-27 of copending Application No. 18006165, claims 1-27 of copending Application No. 18009133, claims 1-23, 25-27 of copending Application No. 18009296, claims 24-34 of copending Application No. 18039757, claims 1-27 of copending Application No. 18009,301. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other for the following reasons. The claims are product-by-process claims encompassing any pectin having any structure and biological activities, which is not limited by and not defined by the recited method steps used to produce the claimed pectin because according to MPEP § 2113:
“[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed.Cir. 1985) (citations omitted)”
The claims and/or specification of the copending applications teach and/or suggest the claimed low methoxyl pectin obtained. Thus, the teachings anticipate the claimed invention.
This is a provisional obviousness-type double patenting rejection because the conflicting claims have not in fact been patented.
Conclusion
No claim is allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Christian L Fronda whose telephone number is (571)272 0929. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday and alternate Fridays between 9:00AM-5:00PM.
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, Robert Mondesi can be reached on (408)918-7584. 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.
/CHRISTIAN L FRONDA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1652
Prosecution Insights