Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/559,090

METHODS FOR MAKING FERMENTED FOOD AND BEVERAGE PRODUCTS USING GY7B YEAST

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Nov 06, 2023
Examiner
GWARTNEY, ELIZABETH A
Art Unit
1759
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Saint Joseph'S University
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
36%
Grant Probability
At Risk
1-2
OA Rounds
4y 1m
To Grant
71%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 36% of cases
36%
Career Allow Rate
238 granted / 660 resolved
-28.9% vs TC avg
Strong +35% interview lift
Without
With
+35.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 1m
Avg Prosecution
59 currently pending
Career history
719
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.4%
-37.6% vs TC avg
§103
50.3%
+10.3% vs TC avg
§102
9.1%
-30.9% vs TC avg
§112
31.5%
-8.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 660 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 Election/Restrictions Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, 12, 18-21, 23, 27 and 29-33 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to non-elected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claims. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on January 8, 2026. Applicant's election with traverse of Group IV, Claims 34, 35 and 37 in the reply filed on January 8, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground that there is not a serious search burden to examine all 20 claims. This is not found persuasive because the claims lack unity of invention under 1.475, i.e., there is no single general inventive concept. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. 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. Claims 34, 35 and 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Farber (WO 2019/018803) in view of Sheppard et al. (WO 2016/187021 A1). Regarding claim 34, Farber discloses a method of producing a yeast-fermented beverage comprising the steps of: (a) fermenting wort (i.e., substrate) in the presence of GY7B yeast to obtain a yeast fermented beverage. Farber disclose GY7B yeast can produce both ethanol and lactic acid (Abstract, p. 26/L2-17). Farber also disclose the GY7B yeast is related to, but genetically and phenotypically distinct from Lachancea thermotolerans (Abstract). While Farber discloses a method of producing a yeast-fermented beverage, i.e., sour beer, the reference is silent with respect to wine, cider, seltzer or mead. Sheppard et al. teaches methods for producing fermented beverages including wine, cider, mead and malt beverages (e.g., beer), the method comprising fermenting at least one carbohydrate (i.e. substrate) in the presences of Lachancea thermotolerans to produce a fermented beverage (p. 9/L14-19, p. 10/L26-p.11/L4). Sheppard et al. teaches L. thermotolerans can produce both ethanol and lactic acid (p. 46/L4-13). Farber and Sheppard et al. are combinable because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely producing fermented beverages using yeast that are known to produce both ethanol and lactic acid in fermentation. Given Sheppard et al. teach it was known to produce beer, wine, mead and cider using L. thermotolerans yeast that produce both ethanol and lactic acid, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to have made a wine, cider or mead in the method of Farber which uses GY7B yeast that produces both ethanol and lactic acid, with a reasonable expectation of success. Regarding claim 35, modified Farber discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Farber discloses the fermented beverage is fermented in the absence of an acid producing bacteria (Abstract, p. 3/L5-18). Farber also discloses the fermentation of the substrate can occur in the presence of a least one additional yeast strain selected from the group consisting of Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Saccharomyces pastor ianus, Saccharomyces paradoxus, Saccharomyces eubayanus, Saccharomyces ludwigii, Aureobasidium pullulans, Cyberlindnera saturnus, Hansensiaspora uvarum, Hansensiaspora guilliermondii, Hansensiaspora osmophila, Hansensiasporavineae, Hansenula anomala, Issatchenkia occidentalis, Issatchenkia orientalis, Pichia kluyveri, Pichia caribbica, Pichia fermentans, Pichia kudriavzevii, Pichia Membranifaciens, Rhodotorula mucilaginosa, Torulaspora delbrueckii, Candida colliculosa, Candida shehatae, Candida tropicalis, Candida ethanolica, Candida krusei, Candida magnolia, Candida milleri, Clavispora lusitaniae, Wickerhamomyces subpelliculosus, Wickerhamomyces anomalus, Zygosaccharomyces rouxii, Zygosaccharomyces bailii, Zygosaccharomyces fermentati, Zygosaccharomycesflorentinus, Kluyveromyces lactis, Kluyveromyces marxianus, Lachancea thermotolerans, Brettanomyces bruxellensis, Brettanomyces anomalus, Brettanomyces custersianus, Brettanomyces naardenensis, Brettanomyces nanus, Dekkera bruxellensis, and Dekkera anomala (p. 3/L11-12, p. 4/L19-p. 5/L8). Regarding claim 37, modified Farber discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Farber discloses the yeast-fermented beverage has a low pH ranging from about 2.5 to about 4.5 (p. 2/L5-22, p. p. 11/L25-p. 12/L18). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH A GWARTNEY whose telephone number is (571)270-3874. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9 a.m. - 5 p.m. EST. 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, Duane Smith can be reached at 571-272-1166. 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. ELIZABETH A. GWARTNEY Primary Examiner Art Unit 1759 /ELIZABETH GWARTNEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 06, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12593857
FERMENTED PEA SOLUBLES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12550925
INFANT NUTRITION WITH HYDROLYSED PROTEIN, IONIC CALCIUM AND PALMITIC ACID
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12507704
Process Recipe Cheese Product With Improved Melt And Firmness And Method For Manufacture
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2025
Patent 12473330
METHOD FOR FRACTIONATING SOLUBLE FRACTIONS OF PEAS, FRACTION THUS OBTAINED AND UPGRADE THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 18, 2025
Patent 12467022
LOW-ALCOHOL BEER
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 11, 2025
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
36%
Grant Probability
71%
With Interview (+35.0%)
4y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 660 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