DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group I in the reply filed on 10/10/2025 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)).
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
The claims are directed to a composition and not the methods mentioned in the Abstract. Please amend the Abstract and remove the discussion regarding inventions that are not claimed.
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) 1, 8-11 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cornelius et al. (US 2003/0203019).
The claims are interpreted as being directed to a powder composition that is capable of being consumed as food.
Regarding Claim 1, Cornelius (‘019) teaches a solid flavour composition (See Abs., paras. 4, 15 and 56.) comprising a plurality of individual components at least one of which is a flavour-providing substance and at least one of which is an auxiliary component, wherein the auxiliary component comprises calcium stearate (See paras. 21, 34, Claims 1, 3, 5, 16.) and a carbonate compound being calcium carbonate (See Claims 1, 6.), however, fails to expressly disclose wherein the solid flavour composition is a powder having a flow index value of 0.15 to 0.24.
Applicant does not set forth any non-obvious unexpected results for providing one flow index value over another. It is noted the claimed range is very broad and includes virtually every conceivable value. It would have been foreseeable and obvious prior to the earliest effective filing date since Cornelius’ (‘019) composition and use are substantially the same as claimed that one could reasonably foresee and expect the flow index value would also be the same. It would have been within the skill set of a person having ordinary skill in the art to adjust the conditions of the components so the composition could be used as intended.
Regarding Claim 8, Cornelius (‘019) teaches wherein the calcium stearate is present in an amount of 0.01 wt. % to 10 wt. %, based on the total weight of the solid flavour composition (See para. 34, Table 2, 2%, 4%).
Regarding Claim 9, Cornelius (‘019) teaches wherein the carbonate compound is present in an amount of 0.01 wt. % to 10 wt. %, based on the total weight of the solid flavour composition (See para. 33, Table 1, 2%, 4%.).
Regarding Claim 10, Cornelius (‘019) teaches wherein the solid flavour composition is free of nanosilica (See claim 1, 3, 6.).
Regarding Claim 11, Cornelius (‘019) teaches wherein the flavour-providing substance imparts a spicy flavour (See para. 56, garlic, a spicy flavor food.).
Regarding Claim 14, Cornelius (‘019) teaches the composition discussed above, however, fails to expressly disclose wherein when stored at 40° C/50% humidity for a period of 8 days shows no caking or clumping.
Applicant does not set forth any non-obvious unexpected results for providing one caking or clumping profile over another. It would have been reasonably foreseeable and obvious prior to the earliest effective filing date since Cornelius’ (‘019) composition and use are substantially the same as claimed that one would expect the caking or clumping properties would also be the same under the conditions as described.
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 October 17, 2025