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 .
Claim status
The examiner acknowledges the amendment to the claims on 06/12/2026.
Claims 1-4, 9-11 and 15-17 are pending in the application. Claims 1-2 and 16-17 are currently amended. Claims 5-8 and 12-14 remain cancelled. Claims 3-4, 9-11 and 15 are previously presented. Claims 1-4, 9-11 and 15-17 are hereby examined on the merits.
Examiner Note
Any objections and/or rejections that are made in the previous actions and are not repeated below, are hereby withdrawn.
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.
Claims 1-4, 9, 11 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishikawa JP 2020058293 A (cited in the IDS filed 09/02/2025, English translation relied upon for reference, hereinafter referred to as Ishikawa) in view of Hideaki JPH11130A (English translation relied upon for reference, hereinafter referred to as Hideaki), Saito US Patent Application Publication No. 2006/0003077 A1 (hereinafter referred to as ‘077) and Li, “Stability of oil-in-water emulsions performed by ultrasound power or high-pressure homogenization”, PLOS One, 2019, 14(3), pages 1-14 (hereinafter referred to as Li).
Regarding claims 1-4, 9, 11, and 15-17, Ishikawa teaches an acidic liquid seasoning comprising an oil phase layered on an emulsified phase (0009), the acidic liquid seasoning comprising, inter alia: 40% or more an edible oil or fat including rapeseed oil, corn oil, safflower oil, olive oil, soybean oil, etc., (0014); vinegar (0022; Example 1-5, Table 1 which teaches 20% vinegar having 4% acidity is present thus the amount of acetic acid is 20% x 4% = 0.8%), 5-40% a plant ground product (e.g., grated onion having a size of 1 mm or less, 0017); 0.01-1.0% a gum such as xanthan gum (0018), and water (0009).
Olive oil as disclosed by Ishikawa reads on the flavor oil as recited in claim 1 (see para. 0038 of the instant specification, which evidences that olive oil is a flavor oil).
Further, Ishikawa teaches that the acidic liquid seasoning is packaged (e.g., bottled, 0025).
Additionally, Ishikawa teaches that the acidic liquid seasoning can contain an emulsifier such as 0.1% or less egg yolk (0022) and even encompasses the embodiment that no yolk is present (0022; 0025; Example 1-5; Table 1).
Additionally, the disclosure of Ishikawa does not mention a starch, a modified starch, or an octenyl succinic acid starch, thus reading on the limitation that the acidic liquid seasoning contains no modified starch.
The amounts of acetic acid and xanthan gum as disclosed by Ishikawa overlap with, encompass or fall within the ranges as recited in claims 1 and 9. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (MPEP 2144.05 I).
Ishikawa as recited above teaches that the acidic liquid seasoning contains 5-40% onion, thus overlapping with the ranges based on dry weight as recited in claims 1 and 4 (calculation: since onion contains ~90% water, then the range of 5-40% grated union is about ~0.5-4% by dry weight).
Additionally, Ishikawa teaches that the viscosity of the emulsified phase is 700-10,000 mPa.s at 25 °C(e.g., 0.7-10 Pa.s, 0021 ), thus given that Ishikawa encompasses an embodiment that the emulsified phase is dominant (e.g., 90%, 0016), it logically follows that the viscosity of the acidic liquid seasoning is at a similar range which overlaps with the range as recited in claims 1 and 3. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (MPEP 2144.05 I).
Ishikawa is silent regarding that the acidic liquid seasoning comprises a plant ingredient that is not ground but comprises a plant material that is the same kind as a plant material in the plant ground product (e.g., onion in the instant case). Ishikawa is further silent regarding the amount of the plant ingredient by weight of the acidic liquid seasoning.
Hideaki in the same field of endeavor teaches a liquid emulsified seasoning that comprises, inter alia, vinegar, water, xanthan gum, oil /fat, and a combination of a grated vegetable (e.g., grated onion) and a dried onion (e.g., dried onion flake) (Abstract; 0007-0009; 0010-0011). Hideaki further teaches that such a combination serves to suppress the change with time during the preservation or control the moisture content of the liquid seasoning (Abstract; 0004). Further, Hideaki teaches that liquid seasoning contains 20-50% grated vegetable and 5-8% dried vegetable (0013).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Ishikawa by including 5-8% dried onion flake in the acidic liquid seasoning of Ishikawa for the benefit of suppressing the change with time during the preservation or controlling the moisture content of the liquid seasoning.
Ishikawa as recited above teaches that the acidic liquid seasoning comprises 40% or more an edible oil or fat thus being silent regarding that the acidic liquid seasoning contains from 19% to 35% (or 33%) edible oil or fat. What Ishikawa teaches is that the amount of oil affects the emulsification and richness (0014).
077 in the same field of endeavor teaches an acidic emulsified liquid seasoning comprising edible oil and fat such as olive oil, vinegar, xanthan gum, onion, and water (0014; 0024; 0027-0030; 0033; Table 1). Further, ‘077 teaches that the content of the edible fat and oil in the acidic emulsified liquid seasoning can be at a range of 10-80% (0029).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Ishikawa by lowering the amount of oil content in the acidic liquid seasoning than 40% within the range of 10-80% with reasonable expectation of success, for the reason that an acidic emulsified seasoning can broadly have 10-80% oil.
The amount of oil as disclosed by ‘077 overlaps with ranges as recited in claims 1 and 16. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (MPEP 2144.05 I).
Ishikawa teaches that the mean (e.g., average) particle size of the oil droplets in the emulsified phase is 20-60 microns (0019), but is silent regarding the mode size of the oil droplet being 35-74 microns (or 42.18-100 microns as recited in claim 2, or 42.18-74 microns as recited in claim 15). However, given that mode size or modal size represents the particle size most commonly found in the distribution, and that the mean oil droplet size as disclosed by Ishikawa is 20-60 microns, it logically follows that the modal size for the oil droplets of Ishikawa overlaps with or falls within the range of 35-74 microns (or 42.18-100 microns as recited in claim 2, or 42.18-74 microns as recited in claim 15). Note that for a symmetric distribution, mean size is actually equal to modal size or median size.
Ishikawa teaches that the mean (e.g., average) particle size of the oil droplets is 20-60 microns but is silent regarding the half-value width of a model size of the oil droplets being 30-56.72 microns or 30.86-56.72 microns as recited in claims 1 and 15, as measured by a laser diffraction device. Half-value width of a model size, or Full Width at Half Maximum (FWHM) is known to measure how uniform particles distributes.
Li teaches that for an oil-in-water emulsion comprising a gum thickener, a wide emulsion particle size distribution signifies a poor stability for the emulsion (page 8, 2nd para.), and approaches including high pressure homogenization and ultrasound power could result in a narrowed particle size distribution (abstract), however, both treatments could also reduce the droplet size and viscosity (Abstract).
Both Ishikawa and Li are directed to oil-in-water emulsions that comprise a gum thickener. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Ishikawa by subjecting the emulsion of Ishikawa to high pressure homogenization or ultrasound power treatment and manipulating the conditions of treatment so as to improve the stability of the emulsion through narrowing the oil droplet particle size distribution but still maintain the oil droplet size and viscosity within the ranges as required by Ishikawa. As such, the FWHM values as recited in claims 1 and 15 are merely obvious variants of the prior art.
Claims 1-4, 9-10 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishikawa JP 2020058293 A (cited in the IDS filed 09/02/2025, English translation relied upon for reference, hereinafter referred to as Ishikawa) in view of Saito US Patent Application Publication No. 2014/0287128 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Saito), Hiroko JP2013111014 A (English translation relied upon for reference, hereinafter referred to as Hiroko), Saito US Patent Application Publication No. 2006/0003077 A1 (hereinafter referred to as ‘077) and Li, “Stability of oil-in-water emulsions performed by ultrasound power or high-pressure homogenization”, PLOS One, 2019, 14(3), pages 1-14 (hereinafter referred to as Li).
Regarding claims 1-4, 9-10, and 15-17, Ishikawa teaches an acidic liquid seasoning comprising an oil phase layered on an emulsified phase (0009), the acidic liquid seasoning comprising, inter alia: 40% or more an edible oil or fat including rapeseed oil, corn oil, safflower oil, olive oil, soybean oil, etc., (0014); vinegar (0022; Example 1-5, Table 1 which teaches 20% vinegar having 4% acidity is present thus the amount of acetic acid is 20% x 4% = 0.8%), 0.01-1.0% a gum such as xanthan gum (0018), and water (0009).
Olive oil as disclosed by Ishikawa reads on the flavor oil as recited in claim 1 (see para. 0038 of the instant specification, which evidences that olive oil is a flavor oil).
Further, Ishikawa teaches that the acidic liquid seasoning is packaged (e.g., bottled, 0025).
Additionally, Ishikawa teaches that the acidic liquid seasoning can contain an emulsifier such as 0.1% or less egg yolk (0022) and even encompasses the embodiment that no yolk is present (0022; 0025; Example 1-5; Table 1).
Additionally, the disclosure of Ishikawa does not mention a starch, a modified starch, or an octenyl succinic acid starch, thus reading on the limitation that the acidic liquid seasoning contains no modified starch.
The amounts of acetic acid and xanthan gum as disclosed by Ishikawa overlap with, encompass or fall within the ranges as recited in claims 1 and 9. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (MPEP 2144.05 I).
Additionally, Ishikawa teaches that the viscosity of the emulsified phase is 700-10,000 mPa.s at 25 °C(e.g., 0.7-10 Pa.s, 0021 ), thus given that Ishikawa encompasses an embodiment that the emulsified phase is dominant (e.g., 90%, 0016), it logically follows that the viscosity of the acidic liquid seasoning is at a similar range which overlaps with the range as recited in claims 1 and 3. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (MPEP 2144.05 I).
Ishikawa is silent regarding that the acidic liquid seasoning comprises a plant ground product that comprises sesame seed, and a plant ingredient that is not ground but comprises a plant material that is the same kind as a plant material in the plant ground product (e.g., sesame seeds in the instant case). Ishikawa is further silent regarding the amount of plant ground product (e.g., ground sesame seeds) or the amount of the plant ingredient that comprises sesame seed that are not ground by weight of the acidic liquid seasoning.
Saito In the same field of endeavor teaches an acidic emulsified liquid seasoning comprising, inter alia, oil such as olive oil, water, gum, and vinegar (0016; 0018; 0022; 0040; 0044; 0048). Additionally, Saito teaches that 6% g sesame seed (e.g., sesame) in ground form can be included in the seasoning for imparting desired taste and texture to the seasoning (0044; Table 5; Table 9).
Hiroko in the same field of endeavor teaches an acidic liquid seasoning comprising, inter alia, oil such as olive oil, vinegar, xanthan gum, water, etc. (Abstract; 0028; 0009; 0033). Hiroko further teaches that 1-20% whole sesame seed can be included in the acidic liquid seasoning such that sesame-specific aroma can be fully felt after storage (Abstract; 0001).
Ishikawa, Saito and Hiroko are all directed to acidic liquid seasonings. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Ishikawa by including 6% ground sesame seeds or 1-20% whole sesame seeds in the acidic liquid seasoning for desired sesame-specific aroma or taste. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have combined ground sesame seeds and whole sesame seeds in the acidic liquid seasoning with reasonable expectation of success, for the reason that "it is prima facie obvious to combine two compositions each of which is taught by the prior art to be useful for the same purpose, in order to form a third composition to be used for the very same purpose.... [T]he idea of combining them flows logically from their having been individually taught in the prior art." In re Kerkhoven, 626 F.2d 846, 850, 205 USPQ 1069, 1072 (CCPA 1980). MPEP 2144.06. In the instant case, prior art has established that either ground or whole sesame seeds can be included in an acidic liquid seasoning for sesame taste/aroma thus one skilled person would have been motivated to combine them for the same purpose.
The amounts of ground sesame seeds or whole sesame seeds as disclosed by Saito and Hiroko fall within, encompass or overlap with the ranges as recited in claims 1, 4, and 17. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (MPEP 2144.05 I).
Ishikawa as recited above teaches that the acidic liquid seasoning comprises 40% or more an edible oil or fat thus being silent regarding that the acidic liquid seasoning contains from 19% to 35% (or 33%) edible oil or fat. What Ishikawa teaches is that the amount of oil affects the emulsification and richness (0014).
077 in the same field of endeavor teaches an acidic emulsified liquid seasoning comprising edible oil and fat such as olive oil, vinegar, xanthan gum, onion, and water (0014; 0024; 0027-0030; 0033; Table 1). Further, ‘077 teaches that the content of the edible fat and oil in the acidic emulsified liquid seasoning can be at a range of 10-80% (0029).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Ishikawa by lowering the amount of oil content in the acidic liquid seasoning than 40% within the range of 10-80% with reasonable expectation of success, for the reason that an acidic emulsified seasoning can broadly have 10-80% oil.
The amount of oil as disclosed by ‘077 overlaps with ranges as recited in claims 1 and 16. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (MPEP 2144.05 I).
Ishikawa teaches that the mean (e.g., average) particle size of the oil droplets in the emulsified phase is 20-60 microns (0019), but is silent regarding the mode size of the oil droplet being 35-74 microns (or 42.18-100 microns as recited in claim 2, or 42.18-74 microns as recited in claim 15). However, given that mode size or modal size represents the particle size most commonly found in the distribution, and that the mean oil droplet size as disclosed by Ishikawa is 20-60 microns, it logically follows that the modal size for the oil droplets of Ishikawa overlaps with or falls within the range of 35-74 microns (or 42.18-100 microns as recited in claim 2, or 42.18-74 microns as recited in claim 15). Note that for a symmetric distribution, mean size is actually equal to modal size or median size.
Ishikawa teaches that the mean (e.g., average) particle size of the oil droplets is 20-60 microns but is silent regarding the half-value width of a model size of the oil droplets being 30-56.72 microns or 30.86-56.72 microns as recited in claims 1 and 15, as measured by a laser diffraction device. Half-value width of a model size, or Full Width at Half Maximum (FWHM) is known to measure how uniform particles distributes.
Li teaches that for an oil-in-water emulsion comprising a gum thickener, a wide emulsion particle size distribution signifies a poor stability for the emulsion (page 8, 2nd para.), and approaches including high pressure homogenization and ultrasound power could result in a narrowed particle size distribution (abstract), however, both treatments could also reduce the droplet size and viscosity (Abstract).
Both Ishikawa and Li are directed to oil-in-water emulsions that comprise a gum thickener. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Ishikawa by subjecting the emulsion of Ishikawa to high pressure homogenization or ultrasound power treatment and manipulating the conditions of treatment so as to improve the stability of the emulsion through narrowing the oil droplet particle size distribution but still maintain the oil droplet size and viscosity within the ranges as required by Ishikawa. As such, the FWHM values as recited in claims 1 and 15 are merely obvious variants of the prior art.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/12/2026 have been fully considered and the examiner’s response is shown below:
The 35 USC 112(b) and 35 USC 112(d) rejection is withdrawn in view of the amendment made to claims 1-2.
Regarding the limitation that the amount of oil and fat in the acidic liquid seasoning is 19-35%, applicant argues on page 9 of the Remarks that modification of Ishikawa with the teaching of Saito ‘077 to reduce the oil content to below 40% would change the principle of Ishikawa and would the primary objective of enhancing the richness of the oil. Applicant further argues that the skilled artisan would understand that reducing oil content below 35% would compromise the property Ishikawa seeks to improve.
The argument is considered but found unpersuasive. The prior art has established that 1) less than 40% or 35% of oil in an emulsified seasoning is proper, and 2) the amount of oil in the acidic liquid seasoning is a result effective variable since it affects the richness of oil in the seasoning. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to vary the content of oil for desired richness. Further, it does not appear that an emulsified seasoning having 40% oil and an emulsified seasoning having 35% oil operate under a different principle, although the latter has less richness of oil sensory feeling. On the other hand, where the ordinary person knows what will happen when he or she reduces the content of oil in a seasoning, applicant has not shown any new, unexpected or critical result associated with the oil content as claimed by evidence.
Applicant argues on page 9 of the Remarks that none of the examples of Saito ‘077 contains less than 40% oil thus failing to provide specific guidance or instruction for using low oil content.
The argument is considered. It is not persuasive. Applicant is relying on prior art reference’s exemplary embodiments to narrow prior art’s effective disclosure. In an obviousness inquiry, all disclosures of the prior art, including unpreferred embodiments, must be considered. Merck & Co.v. Biocraft Labs., Inc.,874 F.2d 804, 807 (Fed. Cir. 1989) (citing In re Lamberti, 545 F.2d 747, 750, 192 USPQ 278,280 (CCPA 1976)). In the instant case, Saito 077 teaches that the content of the edible fat and oil in the acidic emulsified liquid seasoning can be at a range of 10-80% (0029). Such a teaching is sufficient to instruct or guide the skilled person to vary or lower the amount of oil for desired richness. Further, lowering the amount of oil in a seasoning is not rocket science and does not entail undue experimentation.
In view of the above, the rejection of pending claims are maintained.
Conclusion
Pertinent art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure
Maiko JP2008253159A, which teaches an emulsified acidic liquid seasoning comprising 0.5-80% oil.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 CHANGQING LI whose telephone number is (571)272-2334. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-5:00.
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, NIKKI H DEES can be reached at 571-270-3435. 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.
/CHANGQING LI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1791
Prosecution Insights