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 .
Status of the Application
Claims 1-12 filed in a preliminary amendment on 5/4/2023 are pending in the application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 5/4/2023,5/8/2023 and 9/10/2024 were filed before the first Office action. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim 1 and dependent claims 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 1 recites a production method for plant protein food and drink material and/or a plant protein food and drink. The scope of the claimed processed product is unclear. The sole step in the claimed method is treating a plant protein food and drink material and/or a plant protein food and drink with a protein deamidase and at least one enzyme selected from the group consisting of a lipase and a cyclodextrin glucanotransferase. As the substrate, end product , enzyme combinations are ambiguous (and/or) and no compositions or method steps are provided the claimed invention or inventions are not defined sufficiently. One of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the invention or inventions claimed and the scope thereof. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 2 characterizes both the plant protein food and drink material and/or the plant protein food and drink as plant milk. One of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 3 and 6 lists a variety of plant milks each of which has a different composition with a broadly claimed “lipase” which includes lipid hydrolyzing enzymes of various types and therefore would produce different processed products under different conditions with broadly claimed lipases from genus Rhizopus or genus Mucor. Claim 7 limits coconut-derived component in coconut milk with no defined composition. One of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention/s. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8, 9 and 10 recites using an enzyme at a level of 0.5U “or more” and 0.01U “or more” respectively, which does not define the scope of the method. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 11 and 12 do not clearly state the invention/s claimed. “Dispersion stability improver” is undefined, “improve” is a relative term, and the composition claim is undefined because the only known components are two enzymes with no substrate that needs to be stabilized.
A meaningful comparison with prior art is not possible, as all the claims are indefinite, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention/s.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Subbalakshmi Prakash whose telephone number is (571)270-3685. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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.
/SUBBALAKSHMI PRAKASH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1793
Prosecution Insights