Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/256,670

FOODSTUFF PRODUCT

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jun 09, 2023
Examiner
LEBLANC, KATHERINE DEGUIRE
Art Unit
1791
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Société des Produits Nestlé S.A.
OA Round
2 (Final)
34%
Grant Probability
At Risk
3-4
OA Rounds
4y 0m
To Grant
69%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 34% of cases
34%
Career Allow Rate
201 granted / 596 resolved
-31.3% vs TC avg
Strong +35% interview lift
Without
With
+35.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 0m
Avg Prosecution
50 currently pending
Career history
646
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
57.1%
+17.1% vs TC avg
§102
9.1%
-30.9% vs TC avg
§112
28.0%
-12.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 596 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 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, 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim(s) 1-4,21-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lamikanra(US 2016/0309752). Regarding claims 1-3,21, Lamikanra teaches a foodstuff composition comprising a binder and inclusions, wherein the binder comprises water and mucilaginous seeds such as flax seed, chia seed, or mustard seed(para 41). The inclusions can include cereal based inclusions, seed-based inclusions, and nut based inclusions(para 41). Lamikanra teaches that the binder comprises about 85 to 99% moisture and also comprises starch and mucilaginous seeds in an amount of about 1 to about 20 percent by weight(para 24,39). Therefore, the mucilaginous seeds would be present in an amount of up to about 14%(assuming 1% starch). This equates to a weight ratio of mucilaginous seeds to water of about 0.16(14/85). “About 0.16” would be considered to include 0.2 as claimed. Furthermore, Lamikanra teaches that the mucilaginous seeds work synergistically with starch and water to enhance binding properties and higher viscosities(para 42). It would have been obvious to adjust the water and seed ratios in order to provide the effective binder function and viscosity. Lamikanra teaches that the foodstuff can comprise about 5 to 20% binder(para 41), which would reasonably include levels of between 25.0wt% and 35.0wt%. The remainder would comprise the dry inclusions at an amount of 75%-95%. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to adjust the binder and inclusion amounts in order to effectively bind the components and form a crunchy final food product(para 43). Regarding claim 4, Lamikanra teaches that the starch is to be added to the dry inclusions so that it pulls moisture away from the dry inclusions and that the food product is intended to be crunchy(para 43). Therefore, it would have been obvious to ensure that the inclusions do not absorb more than 20.0wt% water based on the weight of the inclusion when held in the binder solution for 20 minutes through the use of starch and mucilaginous materials that absorb water. Regarding claim 22, Lamikanra teaches that the foodstuff can comprise about 5 to 20% binder(para 41) and does not specifically teach between 26.0wt% and 34.0wt% and inclusion between 66.0wt% and 74.0wt%. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to adjust the binder and inclusion amounts in order to effectively bind the components and form a crunchy final food product(para 43). Regarding claim 23, Lamikanra teaches that the binder comprises about 85 to 99% moisture and also comprises starch and mucilaginous seeds in an amount of about 1 to about 20 percent by weight(para 24,39). Therefore, the mucilaginous seeds would be present in an amount of up to about 14%(assuming 1% starch). This equates to a weight ratio of mucilaginous seeds to water of about 0.16(14/85). Lamikanra does not specifically teach a mucilaginous seeds to water in the binder ratio of between 0.275 and 0.375. However, Lamikanra teaches that the mucilaginous seeds work synergistically with starch and water to enhance binding properties and higher viscosities(para 42). It would have been obvious to adjust the water and seed ratios in order to provide the effective binder function and viscosity. Regarding claim 24, Lamikanra is silent on the work of adhesion. However, it would have been obvious to adjust the work of adhesion of the binder in order to ensure that the inclusions are probably held together, i.e. the known and expected function of the binder. Claim(s) 5-9,16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lamikanra(US 2016/0309752) in view of Good Witch Kitchen.net(Apricot Granola Bars). Regarding claims 5-9,16, Lamikanra teaches mixing mucilaginous seeds with water to form a binder and then combining with inclusions to form the bar(para 43). Lamikanra does not specifically teach that the time period for mixing is greater than 5 minutes at a temperature between 15.0C and 35C to form a binder. However, Good Witch Kitchen teaches a method of making apricot granola bars comprising first forming a binder of chia seeds by mixing with orange juice(which is mostly water) at room temperature(25C) and setting aside for at least 5 minutes in order for the chia seeds to gel(step 2). Good Witch Kitchen further teaches mixing the binder with dry ingredients and then molding to form a granola bar(step 4). It would have been obvious to mix the water and mucilaginous seeds in Lamikanra for at least 5 minutes at 25C before combining with the dry ingredients in order to allow the seeds to gel, thus forming a more effective binder. Regarding claim 17, Lamikanra teaches that the foodstuff can comprise about 5 to 20% binder(para 41) and does not specifically teach the binder between 26.0wt% and 34.0wt% and inclusion between 66.0wt% and 74.0wt%. However, it would have been obvious to adjust the binder and inclusion amounts in order to effectively bind the components and form a crunchy final food product(para 43). Regarding claim 18, Lamikanra teaches that the binder comprises about 85 to 99% moisture and also comprises starch and mucilaginous seeds in an amount of about 1 to about 20 percent by weight(para 24,39). Therefore, the mucilaginous seeds would be present in an amount of up to about 14%(assuming 1% starch). This equates to a weight ratio of mucilaginous seeds to water of about 0.16(14/85). Lamikanra does not specifically teach a mucilaginous seeds to water in the binder ratio of between 0.275 and 0.375. However, Lamikanra teaches that the mucilaginous seeds work synergistically with starch and water to enhance binding properties and higher viscosities(para 42). It would have been obvious to adjust the water and seed ratios in order to provide the effective binder function and viscosity. Regarding claim 19, Lamikanra is silent on the work of adhesion. However, it would have been obvious to adjust the work of adhesion of the binder in order to ensure that the inclusions are probably held together, i.e. the known and expected function of the binder. Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Green(WO 02/21937) in view of Lamikanra(US 2016/0309752) further in view of Good Witch Kitchen.net(Apricot Granola Bars). Regarding claim 15, Green teaches a foodstuff comprising inclusions and a binder, wherein the binder comprises water and mucilaginous seeds such as flax(abstract, p.5, line 17). Starch is an optional component in the binder but is not required(p.3, line 4-7). Green does not specifically teach the binder between 25.0wt% and 35.0wt% and inclusion between 65.0wt% and 75.0wt%. However, it would have been obvious to adjust the binder and inclusion amounts in order to effectively bind the components and form a crunchy final food product(para 43). Green is silent on the weight ratio of mucilaginous seeds to water in the binder. However, Lamikanra teaches a foodstuff composition comprising a binder and inclusions, wherein the binder comprises water and mucilaginous seeds such as flax seed, chia seed, or mustard seed(para 41). The inclusions can include cereal based inclusions, seed-based inclusions, and nut based inclusions(para 41). Lamikanra teaches that the binder comprises about 85 to 99% moisture and also comprises starch and mucilaginous seeds in an amount of about 1 to about 20 percent by weight(para 24,39). Therefore, the mucilaginous seeds would be present in an amount of up to about 14%(assuming 1% starch). This equates to a weight ratio of mucilaginous seeds to water of about 0.16(14/85). “About 0.16” would be considered to include 0.2 as claimed. Lamikanra teaches that the mucilage material helps to absorb water and bind the dry ingredients(para 41). It would have been obvious to have a mucilaginous seeds to water of about 0.16 in Green as taught in Lamikanra in order to effectively bind the dry ingredients. Green teaches mixing mucilaginous seeds with water to form a binder and then combining with inclusions to form the bar(example 1). Green does not specifically teach that the time period for mixing is greater than 5 minutes at a temperature between 15.0C and 35C to form a binder. However, Good Witch Kitchen teaches a method of making apricot granola bars comprising first forming a binder of chia seeds by mixing with orange juice(which is mostly water) at room temperature(25C) and setting aside for at least 5 minutes in order for the chia seeds to gel(step 2). Good Witch Kitchen further teaches mixing the binder with dry ingredients and then molding to form a granola bar(step 4). It would have been obvious to mix the water and mucilaginous seeds in Green for at least 5 minutes at 25C before combining with the dry ingredients in order to allow the seeds to gel, thus forming a more effective binder. Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Green(WO 02/21937) in view of Lamikanra(US 2016/0309752). Regarding claim 20, Green teaches a foodstuff comprising inclusions and a binder, wherein the binder comprises water and mucilaginous seeds such as flax(abstract, p.5, line 17). Starch is an optional component in the binder but is not required(p.3, line 4-7). Green does not specifically teach the binder between 25.0wt% and 35.0wt% and inclusion between 65.0wt% and 75.0wt%. However, it would have been obvious to adjust the binder and inclusion amounts in order to effectively bind the components and form a crunchy final food product(para 43). Green is silent on the weight ratio of mucilaginous seeds to water in the binder. However, Lamikanra teaches a foodstuff composition comprising a binder and inclusions, wherein the binder comprises water and mucilaginous seeds such as flax seed, chia seed, or mustard seed(para 41). The inclusions can include cereal based inclusions, seed-based inclusions, and nut based inclusions(para 41). Lamikanra teaches that the binder comprises about 85 to 99% moisture and also comprises starch and mucilaginous seeds in an amount of about 1 to about 20 percent by weight(para 24,39). Therefore, the mucilaginous seeds would be present in an amount of up to about 14%(assuming 1% starch). This equates to a weight ratio of mucilaginous seeds to water of about 0.16(14/85). “About 0.16” would be considered to include 0.2 as claimed. Lamikanra teaches that the mucilage material helps to absorb water and bind the dry ingredients(para 41). It would have been obvious to have a mucilaginous seeds to water of about 0.16 in Green as taught in Lamikanra in order to effectively bind the dry ingredients. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 11/12/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant argues that comparative examples 1 and 2 demonstrate that compositions having a binder content below or above the claimed range of 25.0wt% and 35.0wt% did not form products. However, the prior art Lamikanra teaches that binder composition amounts of “about 20 wt%”, which would include amounts of 25.0wt% effectively form products(para 41). As such, the applicant has not compared the closest prior art. The applicant argues that Lamikanra teaches away from a weight ratio of mucilaginous seeds to water in the binder between 0.20 and 0.50. However, Lamikanra teaches that the binder comprises about 85 to 99% moisture and also comprises starch and mucilaginous seeds in an amount of about 1 to about 20 percent by weight(para 24,39). This equates to a weight ratio of mucilaginous seeds to water of about 0.16(14/85). “About 0.16” would be considered to include 0.2 as claimed. Furthermore, Lamikanra teaches that the mucilaginous seeds work synergistically with starch and water to enhance binding properties and higher viscosities(para 42). It would have been obvious to adjust the water and seed ratios in order to provide the effective binder function and viscosity. 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 KATHERINE D LEBLANC whose telephone number is (571)270-1136. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-4PM EST M-F. 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, Nikki Dees can be reached at 571-270-3435. 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. /KATHERINE D LEBLANC/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1791
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 09, 2023
Application Filed
Aug 09, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Nov 12, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 10, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600802
CONVERTED STARCH AND FOOD COMPRISING SAID CONVERTED STARCH
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12593859
HIGH LOAD FLAVOR PARTICLES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12532897
FROZEN CONFECTION MANUFACTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12495822
Structuring Agent for Use in Foods
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 16, 2025
Patent 12478076
COFFEE COMPOSITION AND ITEMS MADE THEREFROM
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 25, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
34%
Grant Probability
69%
With Interview (+35.1%)
4y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 596 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month