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 request for continued examination filed on 7/1/2026. Claims 1-13 and 15-18 and 21-23 are pending in the application. Claims 1-5,7-13 were amended, claims 14,19,20 were canceled/previously canceled, and new claims 21-23 were added.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 6/8/2026 has been entered.
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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 4/27/2026 and 6/12/2026 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.
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 1-13,15-18, and 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maki et al. (US5681607) in view of Bolt et al. (GB1232900A) and further in view of Pappert (DE2142716A1) cited in an IDS.
Regarding claim 1, 21-23 : Maki discloses roasting green coffee beans with superheated steam for a period of time from 50 to 300 seconds at a steam temperature of from 251 ° to 400° C. at a pressure of 6.5 to 20.0 bar G (7.5 bar A to 21 bar A); and thereafter b) final roasting the beans from stage (a) with steam for period of time ranging from 60 to 800 seconds at a steam temperature of from 251° to 400° C. at substantially atmospheric pressure conditions. Claim 1 is directed to a process for roasting coffee beans comprising roasting unroasted coffee beans in the presence of superheated steam at a temperature of 250° C to 310° C and at a pressure of 11-15 bar for a period between 60 and 170 seconds followed by roasting without steam at a bean temperature of between 200°C and 220°C for a period between 180 and 240 seconds. Claim 21 recites a process for roasting coffee beans comprising roasting unroasted coffee beans in the presence of superheated steam at a pressure greater than 9.5 bar for a period between 20 and 900 seconds followed by roasting without steam at a bean temperature of between 180°C and 260°C for a period between 20 and 1200 seconds. As a steam temperature and upper limit of pressure are unspecified in the first stage and the disclosure does not cover the entire claimed ranges in stages 1 and 2, a meaningful comparison with prior art is not possible. The discussion as applied to claim 1 is partially applicable.
Maki thus discloses roasting green coffee beans using superheated steam under conditions that substantially overlap those recited in the claims in a first roasting stage.
Maki further discloses a second roasting stage having a duration of 60 to 800 seconds . However the reference does not expressly disclose performing the second roasting stage in the absence of steam , as recited in the claims. However, in the second roasting stage, beans in Maki and in claim 1 are maintained at overlapping temperature for overlapping time periods.
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 stage, 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 stage, 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.
Maki recognizes the importance of roasting conditions in achieving the desired flavor characteristics of the roasted coffee and seeks to improve aroma and flavor through the two-stage roasting process.
Bolt discloses that following steam roasting, hot air roasting is a suitable finishing treatment to complete the roast and dry the beans. Pappert discloses 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.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to substitute Bolt’s known hot-air finishing stage for the second stage in Maki because it represents a known alternative finishing technique for roasted beans from the first stage that have been treated with superheated steam that would complete roasting while achieving the desired flavor profile. Additionally, Maki acknowledges that the prior art recognized flavor deficiencies including sourness associated with certain superheated steam roasting processes. In view of this recognition and Bolt’s disclosure of steam-free hot-air finishing to a surface temperature of the beans in the range of 325° to 500°F (163-262°C) after steam roasting, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to employ Bolt’s finishing stage to obtain improved flavor characteristics in the roasted coffee with a reasonable expectation of success.
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 3, the roasting apparatus claimed are conventionally employed for this purpose, therefore no patentable distinction appears.
Regarding claim 4 a manner of subjecting coffee bean to a two -stage process is not specifically restricted to a single location for both stages in the references. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to consider packaging the coffee beans from stage 1 for storage and transport based on targeted end use, for further treatment
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), motivating one of ordinary skill in the art to do likewise in modified Maki with the objective of obtaining a desired taste and aroma profile in a roasted coffee product with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claims 6-13, a roasted coffee blend in modified Maki is expected to have properties as claimed, unless proven otherwise, having been made by superheated steam roasting followed by a post -roasting hot air treatment stage. 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. Maki discloses that in a comparative experiment the single-stage roasting samples were reported by a trained taste panel to be noticeably sour. The samples produced by the teachings of the invention possessed a pleasant fruity-floral character which can be demonstrated analytically by the total pyrazine numbers which were significantly higher versus the single-stage roasting samples. With two-stage steam roasting, a floral flavor was markedly increased. and a fragrant nutty flavor was present. Sourness was suppressed (see Tables 4-9). The acidity and roast color in the exemplary embodiments therein fall within the claimed ranges in claims 8 and 10 respectively. Similar effects are expected in coffee beans processed in modified Maki.
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 Maki, having been heated with superheated steam and hot air wherein the latter stage is a drying stage.
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 Maki does not require non-coffee component presence in roasting coffee beans. No patentable distinction is discerned.
Claims 1-13, 15-18 and 21-23 are therefore prima facie obvious in view of the art.
Response to Arguments
Claim amendments render the previous rejections under 35 USC 112(b) and 35 USDC 103 moot. New grounds of rejection are detailed in the current Office 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
Prosecution Insights