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 .
DETAILED ACTION
1. Applicant’s response filed on February 17, 2026 is acknowledged. Claims 1 and 3 have been amended. Claims 14-16 have been added. Claims 1-16 are currently pending.
Election/Restrictions
2. Applicant's election with traverse of Group III, claims 9-13 and newly added claims 14-16 in the reply filed on February 17, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that all of the groups require the technical feature of a feed containing trehalose and probiotics . If and when the Examiners makes a formal rejection of the elected claims, Applicant will show that they make a contribution over the prior art, in which case, the unity of invention restriction requirement will no longer be applicable and must be withdrawn. Applicant’s traversal is considered. At such time as there is an argument placed on the record in the form of a traversal it will be addressed. Until such a time the lack of unity is maintained for the reasons stated in the restriction requirement. When allowable subject matter is identified rejoinder will be considered.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Priority
3. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on August 13, 2025; November 4, 2024; and August 17, 2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. An initialed copy is attached hereto.
Specification
5. The disclosure is objected to because it contains an embedded hyperlink and/or other form of browser-executable code, see for example page 21. Applicant is required to delete the embedded hyperlink and/or other form of browser-executable code; references to websites should be limited to the top-level domain name without any prefix such as http:// or other browser-executable code. See MPEP § 608.01.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
6. Claim(s) 9-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jilin University, CN103875922A; Published: 06/25/14.
Independent claim 9 is drawn to a feed for livestock and/or poultry, the feed comprising trehalose and probiotics.
Jilin discloses a probiotic feed additive for livestock and poultry to improve the utilization rate of feed, promote animal growth, significantly improve the micro-ecological balance of animal intestines, maintain animal intestinal health, enhance animal immunity, reduce animal morbidity, and improve animal product quality (see abstract; meets claim 16). The feed additive is a powder. The concentration of viable bacteria is greater than 6 billion cfu/g (meets claim 12). The probiotic is Bacillus subtilis (meets claims 10-11 and 14-15). Further the probiotic is mixed with 1-10% of trehalose (meets claims 9 and 12) (see page 3).
As it pertains to claim 13, claim limitations such as “for an early rearing period ”are being viewed as limitations of intended use. A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. In a claim drawn to a process of making, the intended use must result in a manipulative difference as compared to the art. See In re Casey, 152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967) and In re Otto, 136 USPQ 458, 458.
Since the Office does not have the facilities for examining and comparing applicants’ composition with the composition of the prior art, the burden is on applicant to show a novel or unobvious difference between the claimed product and the prior art. See In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 195 USPQ 430 (CCPA 1977) and In re Fitzgerald et al., 205 USPQ 594.
7. Claim(s) 9-13 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Qingdao, CN 103555707 A; Published: 2/5/14.
Independent claim 9 is drawn to a feed for livestock and/or poultry, the feed comprising trehalose and probiotics.
Quingdao discloses compound bacterium agent for livestock. The composition comprises Bacillus subtilis together with a protective material trehalose. The bacteria is a powder at 108-109 viable cfu/g. The trehalose is 3-10% and has a mass ratio 1:1.5-2 (see Quingdao claims 1-3; meets claims 9-13 and 16).
As it pertains to claim 13, claim limitations such as “for an early rearing period ”are being viewed as limitations of intended use. A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. In a claim drawn to a process of making, the intended use must result in a manipulative difference as compared to the art. See In re Casey, 152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967) and In re Otto, 136 USPQ 458, 458.
Since the Office does not have the facilities for examining and comparing applicants’ composition with the composition of the prior art, the burden is on applicant to show a novel or unobvious difference between the claimed product and the prior art. See In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 195 USPQ 430 (CCPA 1977) and In re Fitzgerald et al., 205 USPQ 594.
8. Claim(s) 9-11 and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Schmidt et al, JP2015205896A; Published: 11/19/15.
Independent claim 9 is drawn to a feed for livestock and/or poultry, the feed comprising trehalose and probiotics.
Schmidt discloses compositions formulated as a feed additive comprising Bacillus subtilis and trehalose (see paragraph 0024, 0034-35; meets claims 9-11, 13-16). The compositions are to be used for livestock and poultry (see paragraph 0044; meets claims 9-16). Said additive is pelletized (see paragraph 0050). The probiotic is added at an inclusion rate of about 1 x104- 1x109 CFU (see paragraph 0049).
As it pertains to claim 13, claim limitations such as “for an early rearing period ”are being viewed as limitations of intended use. A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. In a claim drawn to a process of making, the intended use must result in a manipulative difference as compared to the art. See In re Casey, 152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967) and In re Otto, 136 USPQ 458, 458.
Since the Office does not have the facilities for examining and comparing applicants’ composition with the composition of the prior art, the burden is on applicant to show a novel or unobvious difference between the claimed product and the prior art. See In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 195 USPQ 430 (CCPA 1977) and In re Fitzgerald et al., 205 USPQ 594.
Conclusion
9. No claim is allowed.
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAKIA J JACKSON-TONGUE whose telephone number is (571)272-2921. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 930AM-530PM.
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, Daniel Kolker can be reached at (571) 272-3181. 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.
/LAKIA J JACKSON-TONGUE/Examiner, Art Unit 1645 March 20, 2026
/BRIAN GANGLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1645