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 .
This office action is in response to amendment filed on 8/10/26. Claims 13-14,20 are amended. Claims 13-17,19-23,33-37 are pending.
The previous 112 second paragraph rejection is withdrawn due to the amendment.
The previous 103 rejection is withdrawn due to discovery of new prior art. A new ground of rejection follows.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 13-17, 20-23, 33-34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kori ( Jp 2019195286) in view of Lagarrigue ( 2013/0236623) Jp 6188100 and KR 100294462.
For claim 13, Kori discloses a method for preparing skin wrapped food product such as dumpling. The method comprises the steps of preparing a filling by adding thickening polysaccharide including locust bean gum, carrageenan with other ingredients and covering the filling with skin wrap. The skin wrap is prepared from flour, salt, water which is a dough layer. Kori discloses the thickening polysaccharide can be used in combination of two or more. The thickening polysaccharides are crosslinked by divalent metal ions such as calcium ions. The thickening polysaccharides form a gel in the presence of divalent metal ions. Kori discloses that the formation of gel shows a favorable effect in suppression of the transfer of the water. ( see abstract, pages 2-3)
For claims 14,15, 21,23, Kori discloses that the thickening polysaccharides which includes carrageenan, locust bean gum is added in amount of .001-1.5%. ( see page 4)
For claims 16,17, 22,34,Kori discloses adding divalent metal salts such as calcium salt in the range of .001-50 with respect to 1 weight part of thickening polysaccharides which include carrageenan. ( see pages 3-4)
For claim 33, Kori discloses adding one or more flavors, seasoning etc.. to the filling. ( see page 4).
Kori does not disclose the steps of forming the gel as in claims 13,14,15,17,20,21,22,23, the specific proportion of carrageenan as in claims 14,15 and the specific proportion of locust bean gum as in claims 21,23.
Jp100 discloses method of making food product containing gelling agent. Jp100 teaches that carrageenan is a gelling agent that gels with a divalent cation and locust bean gum is a gelling agent that gels by heating. ( see page 3)
KR462 discloses jelly food comprising a gel solution containing a mixture of carrageenan and locust bean gum as gelling agent to give suitable gel strength and texture that is excellent in organoleptic feeling.
LaGarrigue discloses a method of making gel composition. LaGarrigue teaches the steps of mixing gelling agents in water, heating to a temperature of at least 70 degrees C, adding salt and flavoring and cooling to room temperature form the gel. ( see paragraph 0021)
Kori discloses the use of combination of gelling agents that include carrageenan and locust bean gum. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select carrageenan and locust bean gum because Kori discloses a combination of two can be used and a gel is desirable. One skilled in the art would also have been motivated to select carrageenan and locust bean gum because the combination is known to give suitable strength and excellent texture as shown in KR462. Carrageenan gel with divalent cation as shown in JP100. Kori discloses that some of the polysaccharide requires calcium ions for cross-linking. Thus, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to add calcium ion when carrageenan is selected as it’s a gelling agent that gels with divalent cation. It would have been obvious to follow the guideline for the amount disclosed in Kori and to adjust depending on the gel strength desired. It would have been obvious to one skill in the art to determine the amount of carrageenan and locust bean gum within the range allowed for the polysaccharides disclosed in Kori depending on the gel strength and texture desired. For instance, it would have been obvious to use equal amount of .6% of both gums if it desired equal contribution from both gums. Such parameter can readily be determined by one of ordinary skill in the art. Generally, differences in concentration or temperature will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration or temperature is critical. "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to follow the steps disclosed in LaGarrigue to make the gel. As to the properties of the liquid phase, solid phase and the thermally reversible gel, they are obviously inherent in the gel filling Kori because the same gelling ingredients are used. Furthermore, the properties are associated with an intended use of the product. It’s not part of the forming step. As to the product being xiaolongbao, there is no parameter defining a xiaolongbao. Kori discloses a dumpling comprising gel filling covering with an outer dough layer . The product is the same as claimed which can be considered a xiaolongbao.
Claim(s) 19,35,36,37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kori in view of Lagarrigue, Jp 100, KR462 as applied to claims 13-17, 20-23,33-34 above, and further in view of Sagara ( WO 2021145303).
Kori does not disclose the product is vegan as in claim 19, vegetarian as in claim 35 and lacking animal meat and animal product as in claim 36.
Sagara discloses a meat-like food comprising protein. The meat-like product does not use fish or livestock meat. The meat-like product is used in many food products including dumplings. ( see abstract, pages 5, 6,11)
Kori discloses the use meat in the filling. As shown in Sagara, meat-substitute product is used to make filling for dumplings. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the meat-like product disclosed in Sagara as the meat component of Kori when desiring to make vegetarian or vegan food.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 13-17,19-23,33-37 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LIEN THUY TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1408. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday.
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.
October 6, 2026
/LIEN T TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1793
Prosecution Insights