Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/335,201

Pet Food Compositions

Final Rejection §102§103§112
Filed
Jun 15, 2023
Examiner
BEKKER, KELLY JO
Art Unit
1792
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Hill'S Pet Nutrition Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
16%
Grant Probability
At Risk
3-4
OA Rounds
4y 4m
To Grant
50%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 16% of cases
16%
Career Allow Rate
64 granted / 409 resolved
-49.4% vs TC avg
Strong +34% interview lift
Without
With
+34.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 4m
Avg Prosecution
73 currently pending
Career history
482
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
42.1%
+2.1% vs TC avg
§102
15.0%
-25.0% vs TC avg
§112
32.9%
-7.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 409 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
DETAILED ACTION Amendments made November 26, 2025 have been entered. Claims 1, 4-7, 9-13, and 15-23 are pending. Claims 16-20 have been withdrawn. 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 . 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. The rejection of claims 5 and 10 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joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention has been withdrawn in light of applicant’s amendments made November 26, 2025. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. The rejection of claims 1-7 and 11-15 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Badri et al (WO 2020/081079) has been withdrawn in light of applicant’s amendments made November 26, 2025 which require a short chain fatty acid. The rejection of claims 9 and 10 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Badri et al (WO 2020/081079), further as evidenced by Li et al (Compositions of amino acids in feed ingredients for animal diets, Springer-Verlag September 2010, pages 1159-1168) has been withdrawn in light of applicant’s amendments made November 26, 2025 which require a short chain fatty acid. 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 1, 4-7, 11-15, and 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Badri et al (WO 2020/081079) in view of Sunvold et al (US 2016/0249646). Regarding claims 1, 4, 6-7, 11-13, and 15, Badri et al (Badri) teaches a pet food composition (abstract) comprising: about 10-30% fat (paragraph 29); about 20-45% protein, preferably about 25-30% (paragraph 26); about 0.5-3.0%, preferably 0.5-1.5% crude fiber (paragraph 44); and about 25-55% carbohydrate (paragraph 32) each respectively based on total weight of the food composition. Thus, the weight ratio of protein to crude fiber in the composition of Badri is about 6.67:1 (20:3) to about 90:1 (45:0.5), preferably from about 16.7:1 (25:1.5) to about 120:1 (60:0.5). Badri is silent to the pet food as comprising a short chain fatty acid as recited in claims 1 and 13. Sunvold et al (Sunvold) teaches a pet food composition comprising: protein, carbohydrates, and fat, wherein the food comprises a palatant including short chain fatty acids for improving the food acceptance or preference by the animal (abstract, paragraphs 42 and 56, and claim 6). Sunvold teaches increasing the animal preference of pet food is a never end goal of pet food manufacturers (paragraph 3). Regarding the pet food as comprising a short chain fatty, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the pet food of Badri to comprise one or more short chain fatty acids to improve the food acceptance or preference by the animal which is a never end goal of pet food manufacturers, as taught by Sunvold. Regarding claim 5, as Badri teaches the dietary fiber is one or more fibers including crude fiber, and dietary fiber which is insoluble and/or soluble fiber (paragraphs 34-41), the teachings of Badri encompass a pet food product as claimed. Regarding claims 21 and 22, Badri teaches insoluble to soluble fiber in a weight range of about 8:1 to about 14:1 (abstract and paragraph 2). Regarding claim 23, Badri teaches the food comprises about 1.0-10.0% ash (paragraphs 47 and 48). Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Badri et al (WO 2020/081079) in view of Sunvold et al (US 2016/0249646), further as evidenced by Li et al (Compositions of amino acids in feed ingredients for animal diets, Springer-Verlag September 2010, pages 1159-1168). As discussed above, Badri teaches of a pet food composition comprising: about 20-45% protein, preferably about 25-30% protein (abstract and paragraph 26). Badri teaches that the protein can be supplied from a variety of sources including: meats, meat by products, fish, poultry, dairy proteins, eggs, soybean meal, cottonseed, peanut meal (paragraphs 24 and 25). Badri is silent to the amino acids within the protein, however, as evidenced by Li et al (Li) the proteins disclosed by Badri, including casein (a dairy protein), corn grain, cotton seed meal, fish meal, meat and bone meal, peanut meal, poultry by product meal and soybean meal all contained the amino acids glycine and proline (Table 3). Thus, the composition taught by Badri encompasses the product as recited in clams 9 and 10. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed November 26, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that although Badri teaches protein and crude fiber as neither Badri nor Sunvold are specific to the ratio between the two, to experiment with a ratio of protein and crude fiber would not have been obvious and there would be no motivation to modify the references to do so. This argument is not convincing as it does not consider the position of record. As stated previously, and above, the teachings of Badri teach crude fiber and protein which necessarily produces a ratio within the claimed range. Thus, the teachings of Badri encompass the range claimed and no modification is being made. Applicant argues that the claimed composition provides for unexpected results. This argument is not convincing at least because: 1) it does not compare the closest prior art of record, and 2) is not commensurate in scope with the claims. The evidence is limited to one example composition (Example a) which does not represent the breadth of the claims. 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 KELLY BEKKER whose telephone number is (571)272-2739. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-3:30pm. 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. KELLY BEKKER Primary Patent Examiner Art Unit 1792 /KELLY J BEKKER/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1792
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 15, 2023
Application Filed
Jun 15, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 25, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Nov 26, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 06, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12575588
Natural Pet Chew Product and Method of Manufacture
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12490753
VEGAN ALTERNATIVE TO CHEESE (II)
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 09, 2025
Patent 11109609
NON-DAIRY HIGH-DENSITY KOSHER FROZEN DESSERT PRODUCT AND PROCESS THEREFOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 07, 2021
Patent 11051539
LOW SODIUM SALT SUBSTITUTE WITH POTASSIUM CHLORIDE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jul 06, 2021
Patent 10980264
THERMALLY INHIBITED AGGLOMERATED STARCH
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 20, 2021
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
16%
Grant Probability
50%
With Interview (+34.2%)
4y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 409 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