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 .
Status of the Application
Receipt is acknowledged of the amendment and response filed 12/17/2025. Claims 1-13 and 15-20 are pending in the application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/24/2025 was filed before close of prosecution in the application. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered, but are not persuasive for the following reasons:
Claims recite a broad range of values: pressure of superheated steam greater than 9.5 bar for time between 20 and 900 seconds, steam-free roasting temperature between 180 ° C and 260 ° C for time between 20 and 1200 seconds. However, only a limited combination of specific parameters (superheated steam pressure 11-15 bar in, steam temperature 300 ° C, steam time 60-170 s; steam-free roasting temperature 200-220 ° C, time 210 s) are provided by the specification examples of the present application. It is not known whether every possible condition within the claimed ranges would produce the argued results.
Specifically, the arguments do not address operation at claimed temperatures of about 180 deg. C. At pressures greater than 9.5 bar (gauge) such temperatures correspond to saturated or wet steam conditions, not superheated steam. The claim however requires superheated steam , which necessitates temperatures above the saturation temperature at the claimed pressure (approximately 182 deg. C or higher). Accordingly, applicant’s reliance on such conditions does not establish the presence of superheated steam as required by the claim.
Furthermore, the applied reference Bolt teaches steam processing at comparable pressures and temperatures, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have routinely optimized conditions to superheated steam, to achieve predictable differences in heat transfer behavior, resulting in preventing burnt residues as taught in Pappert.
For these reasons, applicant’s arguments are not persuasive and the rejection is maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-13 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bolt et al. (GB1232900A) in view of Pappert (DE2142716A1) cited in an IDS.
Regarding claim 1,3 and 4, 19 and 20, Bolt discloses a process for producing roasted coffee beans (page 2 lines 65-110) with improved flavor by steam roasting followed by roasting without steam. In the first step, green coffee beans of Robusta type (of moisture content 8-14%, and of "L" Hunter-color value 39-42) are transferred at 21-38 degrees C in a steam roast zone (previously liberated from atm. air by vacuum and steam), roasted by steam of temperature 166-199 degrees C, partial steam pressure 6.3-14.0 bar (over-pressure), and coffee moisture 15-35%, for 2-12 min., until the coffee attains a Hunter color value 22-33. Overpressure is released quickly, and the treated beans are conveyed to an expansion zone. In the 2nd step, coffee beans of moisture 10-30% are transferred at 38-100 degrees C into a post-roasting zone and treated in air 7.5-30.0 min. at 199-538 degrees C until the surface temperature of beans attains 163-260 degrees C and the beans have moisture content 2-5%, and color "L" 18.5-26.0 by the Hunter scale.
The advantage is possibility of using increased amounts of Robusta type beans that have a strong taste without the risk of obtaining undesired after tastes in coffee blends. Robusta coffee roasted by the process has a plum-like taste with a finely acidic shade resembling green apples. Bolt does not specifically disclose superheated steam in steam treatment.
Pappert however disclose that roasting of coffee beans in rotary ovens or in stationary containers in a fluidized bed is improved by introduction of superheated steam, which prevents formation of burnt residues or removes them and mechanical means for removing burnt residues can be dispensed with. The taste of coffee is improved.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have considered applying superheated steam for an appropriate period of time to obtain a desired taste in steam roasted coffee beans without bunt residue formation with a reasonable expectation of success. Bolt discloses that of partial pressures exceeding about 200psig (14 bar) are utilized roasting times less than about 2 minutes will be provided (page 4 lines 88-92).
Regarding claim 2, Bolt discloses that the green beans charged to steam treatment are at 70-100deg F (unheated) (page 3 lines 10-12).
Regarding claim 5, Bolt discloses that Robusta beans are steam roasted and post roasted and blended with other types of roasted beans roasted under other conditions (page 7 lines 85-90).
Regarding claims 6-13, a roasted coffee blend in modified Bolt is expected to have properties as claimed unless proven otherwise, having been made by superheated steam roasting followed by a post -roasting step. The method improves taste properties and prevents formation of burnt residues, for example a plum like taste with reduced burnt flavor, meeting the requirements in claim 6, and is mildly acidic as required in claim 7, with a roast color as in claim 10 or 13. One of ordinary skill in the art would routinely blend different types of coffee beans roasted by different methods in proportions as needed, and prepare ground coffee , with desired taste characteristics and residual solids content in a brew.
Regarding claim 12, packaging a pre-roasted coffee for further roasting does not provide a patentable distinction.
Regarding claim 15, performing superheated steam roasting and no steam roasting in separate devices is considered a selection made based on routine process design absent unexpected results.
Regarding claim 16, it is expected that roasted beans would have a lower moisture content in modified Bolt, having been heated with superheated steam.
Regarding claim 17, the significance of “wherein the roasting the unroasted coffee beans in the presence of the superheated steam is performed in a perforated drum in a pressurizable chamber” is unestablished, absent unexpected results attributed to such apparatus use.
Regarding claim 18, modified Bolt does not require non-coffee component presence in roasting coffee beans. No patentable distinction is discerned.
Claims 1-13 and 15-20 are therefore prima facie obvious in view of the art.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Subbalakshmi Prakash whose telephone number is (571)270-3685. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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.
/SUBBALAKSHMI PRAKASH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1793