Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 18/478,591

ENZYMATIC SYNTHESIS OF GALACTO-OLIGOSACCHARIDES FROM CONCENTRATED SWEET WHEY PERMEATE AND APPLICATION THEREOF IN DAIRY PRODUCTS

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Sep 29, 2023
Examiner
O'HERN, BRENT T
Art Unit
1793
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Alpina Productos Alimenticios S A Bic
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
1216 granted / 1560 resolved
+12.9% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+20.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
42 currently pending
Career history
1602
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
41.2%
+1.2% vs TC avg
§102
14.6%
-25.4% vs TC avg
§112
37.9%
-2.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1560 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II in the reply filed on 2/13/2026 is acknowledged. Drawings The drawings are objected to because some of the text in Figures 3b is in Spanish instead of English. PNG media_image1.png 358 556 media_image1.png Greyscale Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Specification The following guidelines illustrate the preferred layout for the specification of a utility application. These guidelines are suggested for the applicant’s use. Arrangement of the Specification As provided in 37 CFR 1.77(b), the specification of a utility application should include the following sections in order. Each of the lettered items should appear in upper case, without underlining or bold type, as a section heading. If no text follows the section heading, the phrase “Not Applicable” should follow the section heading: (a) TITLE OF THE INVENTION. (b) CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS. (c) STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT. (d) THE NAMES OF THE PARTIES TO A JOINT RESEARCH AGREEMENT. (e) INCORPORATION-BY-REFERENCE OF MATERIAL SUBMITTED ON A READ-ONLY OPTICAL DISC, AS A TEXT FILE OR AN XML FILE VIA THE PATENT ELECTRONIC SYSTEM. (f) STATEMENT REGARDING PRIOR DISCLOSURES BY THE INVENTOR OR A JOINT INVENTOR. (g) BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION. (1) Field of the Invention. (2) Description of Related Art including information disclosed under 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98. (h) BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION. (i) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWING(S). (j) DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION. (k) CLAIM OR CLAIMS (commencing on a separate sheet). (l) ABSTRACT OF THE DISCLOSURE (commencing on a separate sheet). (m) SEQUENCE LISTING. (See MPEP § 2422.03 and 37 CFR 1.821 - 1.825). A “Sequence Listing” is required on paper if the application discloses a nucleotide or amino acid sequence as defined in 37 CFR 1.821(a) and if the required “Sequence Listing” is not submitted as an electronic document either on read-only optical disc or as a text file via the patent electronic system. When there are drawings, there shall be a “brief description of the several views of the drawings” (See 37 C.F.R. 1.74.). The section heading “brief description of the several views of the drawings” as set forth in 37 C.F.R. 1.74 is missing. Please correct. Claim Objections Claim 10, line 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: please set forth the unabbreviated text for GOS. Appropriate correction is required. 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. Claims 10-15 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. The numerous “%” values in Claim 10 are vague and indefinite as it is unclear whether the % are mass, volume or something else. The “%” values in Claim 15 are vague and indefinite as it is unclear whether the % are mass, volume or something else. Clarification and/or correction required. 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. Claim(s) 10-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Doring et al. (US 2022/0411455). 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 10-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Doring et al. (US 2022/0411455). Regarding claim 10, Doring (‘455) teaches an enzymatic process to obtain a GOS ingredient from whey permeate comprising ultrafiltering (UF), nanofiltering (NF), reacting a retentate with β-galactosidase until a dilute GOS ingredient is obtained (See FIG-1.), PNG media_image2.png 294 732 media_image2.png Greyscale wherein the whey permeate comprises carbohydrates, minerals, and water (See paras. 39-43, 60-61.); wherein in the reaction time is 30 minutes (See Abs.); wherein the enzyme is inactivated by increasing the temperature to a temperature between 80 to 100° C (See paras. 31, 60.); wherein the reaction takes place at a temperature of 45-55 oC or 50- 60 oC for 30 minutes (See para. 30 and Claim 1.); diafiltrating the concentrated GOS ingredient (See FIG-1, paras. 62+.) and inherently teaches the ingredient as Doring’s (‘455) process for producing GOS ingredient and end use are substantially the same as Applicant describes in the Specification. Regarding claim 11, Doring (‘455) inherently teaches the ingredient having the claimed degree of polymerization as Doring’s (‘455) process for producing GOS ingredient and end use (See FIG-1, paras. 39-43, 60-61, Claim 1.) are substantially the same as Applicant describes in the Specification. Regarding claim 12, Doring (‘455) inherently teaches the ingredient having the claimed degree of polymerization as Doring’s (‘455) process for producing GOS ingredient and end use (See FIG-1, paras. 39-43, 60-61, Claim 1.) are substantially the same as Applicant describes in the Specification. Regarding claim 13, Doring (‘455) inherently teaches the claimed solids comprising galactose, glucose and lactose (See FIG-1, paras. 39-43, 60-61, Claim 1.) as the process for producing GOS ingredient and end use are substantially the same as Applicant describes in the Specification. Regarding claim 14, Doring (‘455) inherently teaches the claimed minerals (See FIG-1, paras. 39-43, 60-61, Claim 1.) as the process for producing GOS ingredient and end use are substantially the same as Applicant describes in the Specification. Regarding claim 15, Doring (‘455) inherently teaches the claimed water concentration (See FIG-1, paras. 39-43, 60-61, Claim 1.) as the process for producing GOS ingredient and end use are substantially the same as Applicant describes in the Specification. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRENT T O'HERN whose telephone number is (571)272-6385. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 5:00 am - 3:30 pm. 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. /BRENT T O'HERN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1793 February 16, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 29, 2023
Application Filed
Jun 17, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 22, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599149
OILY FOOD FOR FROZEN DESSERTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12593862
COATED PROBIOTIC, FOOD COMPOSITION CONTAINING THE SAME AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588691
DIET FORMULATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590287
LACTIC ACID BACTERIAL STRAIN WITH IMPROVED TEXTURIZING PROPERTIES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590275
BEVERAGES COMPOSED OF FRUIT AND/OR VEGETABLE COMPONENTS AND METHODS FOR PRODUCING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+20.0%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1560 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