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
Claims 1-19 are pending. Claims 1-10, 15, and 17-19 are examined on the merits. Claims 11-14 and 16 are withdrawn.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group I (Claims 1-10, 15, and 17-19), the species fish oil, sodium chloride, a thickener, in the reply filed on 1/14/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 11-14 and 16 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 1/14/2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/19/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-3, 5-10, 15, 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. This is a “written description” rejection, rather than an enablement rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph. Applicant us directed to the Guidelines for the Examination of Patent Applications under the 354 U.S.C. 112, 1 “Written Description” Requirement, Federal Register, Vol. 66, No. 4, pages 1099-1111, Friday January 5, 2001.
The claims are drawn to medicament comprising bioactive component embedded in a matrix of agar and glycerol. “Bioactive component” does not limit the medicament to only compounds from a specific source. However, the specification only discloses oils from marine animals. In analyzing whether the written description requirement is met for genus claims, it is first determined whether a representative number of species have been sufficiently described. In this case, only marine oil has been described while the claims potentially encompass thousands of types of bioactive components. Applicant has not demonstrated what the bioactive compounds of Claim 1 are and what other bioactive components might potentially encompass. This limited information is not deemed sufficient to reasonably convey to one skilled in the art that Applicant was in possession of active compounds extracted from all types of plants at the time the application was filed. Thus, it is concluded that the written description requirement is not satisfied for the claimed genus.
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) 1, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 15, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yim et al. (CN 103536579 B).
Yim et al. teaches a microcapsule made of agar and filling material is fish oil with loading substance glycerol (page 13, last paragraph, page 14, lines 1-2). The micro-capsule disclosed by weight micro-capsule can contain about 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 55, 60, 65, 70, 75, 80, 85, or 90% (page 13, paragraph 5), which would render the bioactive material within the 15% weight range. A bioactive component of The nutritional supplement can be designed for human or animal, recommendation given based on food intake of an individual. species such considerations are typically based on different factors, such as described above, age, and sex, and these factors are known or common technique by those skilled in the art to determine. A component feed in one example, these supplements are disclosed useful animals, the animals such as, but not limited to, livestock (e.g., pigs, chicken, cow, goat, horse, etc.), and domestic pets (for example, cats, dogs, birds, etc.) ( page 19, last paragraph). the food is a baked food, edible dry noodles (pasta), a meat product, a frozen dairy product, a milk product, a cheese product, an egg, seasoning, soup powder, snack food, a nut product, a plant protein product, a hard candy, a soft candy, a poultry product, processing of juice, granulated sugar (e.g., white or brown), a sauce, a gravy, a syrup, a nutritional bar (nutritionalbar), beverage, beverage powder, a jam or jelly, a fish product, or pet companion food (pct companion food) (page 21, paragraph 3). Carrier include sodium chloride solution (page 20, paragraph 6). EPA and DHA is obtained from dietary sources (e.g., oily fish). known rich diet of fish oil with multiple kinds of beneficial effect with respect to heart disease, cancer, arthritis, allergies, and other chronic diseases. clinical test of epidemiology has display, increasing the dietary intake of ω -3 fatty acid in the form of fish or fish oil supplement can reduce the different risk factors associated with cardiovascular disease (page 22, paragraph 2) and prevention of inflammation ( page 22, paragraph 1). These compositions (including nutritional supplements, delivery device and drug formulation) disclosed can typically by oral administration (page 23, paragraph 5). A micro-capsule of the "effective amount" can be in pure form or (wherein such form) in the form of a pharmaceutically acceptable salt, and with or without a pharmaceutically acceptable excipient, carrier, or other additive (page 23, paragraph 2). These compositions can be added to food, no substantial degradation in the food preparation process (page 21, paragraph 5). Water is the additive for adding to agar (page 24, paragraph 2, example 1). Water would inherently have a water activity level from 0.45-0.7 because water has the same activity.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-10, 15, and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yim et al. (CN 103536579 B).
Yim et al. teaches a microcapsule made of agar and filling material is fish oil with loading substance glycerol (page 13, last paragraph, page 14, lines 1-2). The micro-capsule disclosed by weight micro-capsule can contain about 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 55, 60, 65, 70, 75, 80, 85, or 90% (page 13, paragraph 5), which would render the bioactive material within the 15% weight range. A bioactive component of The nutritional supplement can be designed for human or animal, recommendation given based on food intake of an individual. species such considerations are typically based on different factors, such as described above, age, and sex, and these factors are known or common technique by those skilled in the art to determine. A component feed in one example, these supplements are disclosed useful animals, the animals such as, but not limited to, livestock (e.g., pigs, chicken, cow, goat, horse, etc.), and domestic pets (for example, cats, dogs, birds, etc.) ( page 19, last paragraph). the food is a baked food, edible dry noodles (pasta), a meat product, a frozen dairy product, a milk product, a cheese product, an egg, seasoning, soup powder, snack food, a nut product, a plant protein product, a hard candy, a soft candy, a poultry product, processing of juice, granulated sugar (e.g., white or brown), a sauce, a gravy, a syrup, a nutritional bar (nutritionalbar), beverage, beverage powder, a jam or jelly, a fish product, or pet companion food (pct companion food) (page 21, paragraph 3). Carrier include sodium chloride solution (page 20, paragraph 6). EPA and DHA is obtained from dietary sources (e.g., oily fish). known rich diet of fish oil with multiple kinds of beneficial effect with respect to heart disease, cancer, arthritis, allergies, and other chronic diseases. clinical test of epidemiology has display, increasing the dietary intake of ω -3 fatty acid in the form of fish or fish oil supplement can reduce the different risk factors associated with cardiovascular disease (page 22, paragraph 2) and prevention of inflammation ( page 22, paragraph 1). These compositions (including nutritional supplements, delivery device and drug formulation) disclosed can typically by oral administration (page 23, paragraph 5). A micro-capsule of the "effective amount" can be in pure form or (wherein such form) in the form of a pharmaceutically acceptable salt, and with or without a pharmaceutically acceptable excipient, carrier, or other additive (page 23, paragraph 2). These compositions can be added to food, no substantial degradation in the food preparation process (page 21, paragraph 5). Water is the additive for adding to agar (page 24, paragraph 2, example 1). Water would inherently have a water activity level from 0.45-0.7 because water has the same activity.
However, Yim et al. does not teach water in range of 6-24% w/w, sodium chloride in range of 0.4-1.6 % w/w, agar in range of 1.4-9.6% w/w, glycerol in range of 20-36% w/w, coloring agent is caramel or carbon black.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to make a composition comprising water in range of 6-24% w/w, sodium chloride in range of 0.4-1.6 % w/w, agar in range of 1.4-9.6% w/w, glycerol in range of 20-36% w/w of the active agent combination for the following reasons. The reference does teach the composition for pet food. Yim et al. teaches a microcapsule made of agar and filling material is fish oil with loading substance glycerol (page 13, last paragraph, page 14, lines 1-2). The micro-capsule disclosed by weight micro-capsule can contain about 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 55, 60, 65, 70, 75, 80, 85, or 90% (page 13, paragraph 5), which would render the bioactive material within the 15% weight range. Carrier include sodium chloride solution (page 20, paragraph 6). Thus, it would have been obvious to make a concentrated composition containing both flavonoids and tocotrienols for use as a supplement to the diet. Additionally, the amount of a specific ingredient in a composition that is used for a particular purpose (the composition itself or that particular ingredient) is clearly a result effective parameter that a person of ordinary skill in the art would routinely optimize. "[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). Thus, optimization of general conditions is a routine practice that would be obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to employ. It would have been customary for an artisan of ordinary skill to determine the optimal amount of each ingredient to add in order to best achieve the desired results, especially within the ranges taught by the reference. Thus, absent some demonstration of unexpected results from the claimed parameters, this optimization of ingredient amount would have been obvious at the time of applicant’s invention.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add coloring to pet food because pet food are usually brown or caramel in color. One would have been motivated to make pet food with color for the expected benefit of making the pet food look more palatable for the animal. Absent evidence to the contrary, there would have been a reasonable expectation of success in making the claimed invention from the combined teachings of the cited references.
Conclusion
No claim is allowed.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CATHERYNE CHEN whose telephone number is (571)272-9947. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9-5:30 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, Anand U Desai can be reached on 571-272-0947. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
Catheryne Chen Examiner Art Unit 1655
/ANAND U DESAI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1655