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
Claims 15-22 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on July 1, 2026.
Applicant’s election without traverse of species (1) one or more 1,3-dibromo-5,5-dialkylhydantoins in the reply filed on July 1, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-14 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McNaughton (US 2004/0265446 A1) in view of Man et al (US 2005/0159324 A1).
In regard to claim 1-6 and 12, McNaughton discloses that an opened eviscerated carcass is subjected to inside-outside washing (IOBW) with water treated with at least one 1,3-dibromo-5,5-dialkylhydantoin (DBDAH). Preferably, water treated with at least one DBDAH is brought into contact with a defeathered poultry carcass before the carcass has been opened, and after a period of time during which the carcass remains wet with treated water thereon, the carcass is opened and eviscerated. Then the opened, eviscerated carcass is subjected to IOBW with water treated with DBDAH. Preferably, after the IOBW treatment, the carcass is subsequently subjected to chilling in a chill tank in which water treated with DBDAH is employed as the chilling medium. Optionally, but preferably, the chilled carcass is washed before packaging by a spray with and/or immersion in water treated with DBDAH. These procedures provide very effective microbiocidal control and do not adversely affect the appearance, quality, or taste of the poultry meat product (Abstract).
Hence, McNaughton meets the limitations of claims 1-6 regarding treatment/washing of poultry with 1,3-dibromo-5,5-dialkylhydantoin (DBDAH).
In regard to claim 12, McNaughton discloses that an opened eviscerated carcass is subjected to inside-outside washing (IOBW) with water treated with at least one 1,3-dibromo-5,5-dialkylhydantoin (DBDAH).
McNaughton discloses that other additives can be used in conjunction with the 1,3-dibromo-5,5-dialkylhydantoin(s) including surfactants ([0047]). McNaughton is silent as to the composition comprising amine oxide.
Man et al discloses methods for reducing microbial contamination on poultry, or on surfaces used in processing poultry, employing compositions including medium chain peroxycarboxylic acid, and to the compositions. The methods include applying a medium chain peroxycarboxylic acid composition to poultry or to the surfaces. (Abstract).
Man et al discloses including amine oxides and/or betains into the antimicrobial composition for treating poultry in order to form foaming or gelled versions of the antimicrobial composition:
[0065] Foam Treating Poultry
[0066] In another alternative embodiment of the present invention, the poultry product can be treated with a foaming version of the composition. The foam can be prepared by mixing foaming surfactants with the washing solution at time of use. The foaming surfactants can be nonionic, anionic or cationic in nature. Examples of useful surfactant types include, but are not limited to the following: alcohol ethoxylates, alcohol ethoxylate carboxylate, amine oxides, alkyl sulfates, alkyl ether sulfate, sulfonates, quaternary ammonium compounds, alkyl sarcosines, betaines and alkyl amides. The foaming surfactant can be mixed at time of use with the washing solution. Use solution levels of the foaming agents is from about 50 ppm to about 2.0 wt-%. At time of use, compressed air can be injected into the mixture, then applied to the poultry product surface through a foam application device such as a tank foamer or an aspirated wall mounted roamer.
[0067] Gel Treating Poultry
[0068] In another alternative embodiment of the present invention, the poultry product can be treated with a thickened or gelled version of the composition. In the thickened or gelled state the washing solution remains in contact with the poultry product surface for longer periods of time, thus increasing the antimicrobial efficacy. The thickened or gelled solution will also adhere to vertical surfaces. The composition or the washing solution can be thickened or gelled using existing technologies such as: xanthan gum, polymeric thickeners, cellulose thickeners or the like. Rod micelle forming systems such as amine oxides and anionic counter ions could also be used. The thickeners or gel forming agents can be used either in the concentrated product or mixing with the washing solution, at time of use. Typical use levels of thickeners or gel agents range from about 100 ppm to about 10 wt-%.
Man et al discloses including amine oxides into the antimicrobial composition ([0066], [0068], [0150], [0152], [0153], [0160], [0312], [0381]).
In regard to the specific amine oxides and claims 7-11, Man et al discloses:
[0153] Useful water soluble amine oxide surfactants are selected from the octyl, decyl, dodecyl, isododecyl, coconut, or tallow alkyl di-(lower alkyl) amine oxides, specific examples of which are octyldimethylamine oxide, nonyldimethylamine oxide, decyldimethylamine oxide, undecyldimethylamine oxide, dodecyldimethylamine oxide, isododecyldimethyl amine oxide, tridecyldimethylamine oxide, tetradecyldimethylamine oxide, pentadecyldimethylamine oxide, hexadecyldimethylamine oxide, heptadecyldimethylamine oxide, octadecyldimethylaine oxide, dodecyldipropylamine oxide, tetradecyldipropylamine oxide, hexadecyldipropylamine oxide, tetradecyldibutylamine oxide, octadecyldibutylamine oxide, bis(2-hydroxyethyl)dodecylamine oxide, bis(2-hydroxyethyl)-3-dodecoxy-1-h- ydroxypropylamine oxide, dimethyl-(2-hydroxydodecyl) amine oxide, 3,6,9-trioctadecyldimethylamine oxide and 3-dodecoxy-2-hydroxypropyldi-(2- -hydroxyethyl) amine oxide.
Both references are directed to the reduction of microbial contamination of poultry carcasses. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to modify McNaughton in view of Man et al and to include amine oxides into the antimicrobial composition as a conventional component in the antimicrobial composition for poultry carcass processing.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to modify McNaughton in view of Man et al and to include amine oxides and/or betains into the antimicrobial composition in order to form either foaming or gel version of composition as suggested by Man et al. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to increase the time of contact of antimicrobial solution with the poultry product surface, thus increasing the antimicrobial efficacy, as suggested by Man et al. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to ensure that antimicrobial solution also adheres to vertical surfaces as suggested by Man et al. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to modify McNaughton in view of Man et al and to include amine oxides and/or betains into the antimicrobial composition in order to further improve poultry carcass processing.
In regard to claims 13 and 23, McNaughton discloses that the composition provides bromine residual in the range of about 3 to about 150 ppm (wt/wt) as free bromine, and preferably in the range of about 50 to about 100 ppm (wt/wt) as free bromine ([0029], [0032], [0034], [0035]).
In regard to claim 14, McNaughton discloses:
As seen from the above, in the practice of this invention bromine-based microbiocidal aqueous solutions of at least one 1,3-dibromo-5,5-dialkylhydantoin are employed in multiple stages. These solutions are formed by dissolving one or more 1,3-dibromo-5,5-dialkylhyd- antoins in water. Preferred are 1,3-dibromo-5,5-dialkylhydantoins in which one of the alkyl groups is a methyl group and the other alkyl group contains in the range of 1 to about 4 carbon atoms. Thus these preferred biocides comprise 1,3-dibromo-5,5-dimethylhydantoin, 1,3-dibromo-5-ethyl-5-methylhydantoin, 1,3-dibromo-5-n-propyl-5-methylhyd- antoin, 1,3-dibromo-5-isopropyl-5-methylhydantoin, 1,3-dibromo-5-n-butyl-5- -methylhydantoin, 1,3-dibromo-5-isobutyl-5-methylhydantoin, 1,3-dibromo-5-sec-butyl-5-methylhydantoin, 1,3-dibromo-5-tert-butyl-5-met- hylhydantoin, and mixtures of any two or more of them. Of these biocidal agents, 1,3-dibromo-5-isobutyl-5-methylhydantoin, 1,3-dibromo-5-n-propyl-- 5-methylhydantoin, and 1,3-dibromo-5-ethyl-5-methylhydantoin are, respectively, preferred, more preferred, and even more preferred members of this group from the cost effectiveness standpoint. Of the mixtures of the foregoing biocides that can be used pursuant to this invention, it is preferred to use 1,3-dibromo-5,5-dimethylhydantoin as one of the components, with a mixture of 1,3-dibromo-5,5-dimethylhydantoin and 1,3-dibromo-5-ethyl-5-methylhydantoin being particularly preferred. The most preferred member of this group of microbiocides is 1,3-dibromo-5,5-dimethylhydantoin. This compound is available in the marketplace under the trade designations XtraBrom.TM. 111 biocide and XtraBrom.TM. 111T biocide (Albemarle Corporation). When a mixture of two or more of the foregoing 1,3-dibromo-5,5-dialkylhydantoin biocides is used pursuant to this invention, the individual biocides of the mixture can be in any proportions relative to each other. Minor proportions of mono-N-bromo-5,5-dialkylhydantoin(s) can be present along with the 1,3-dibromo-5,5-dialkylhydantoin(s) but such compositions are not preferred ([0044]).
Hence, McNaughton discloses 1,3-dibromo-5,5-dimethylhydantoin and meets the limitation of claim 14.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VERA STULII whose telephone number is (571)272-3221. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 5:30AM-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, 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.
/VERA STULII/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1791
Prosecution Insights