Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 18/600,409

FOOD PRESERVING COATINGS

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Mar 08, 2024
Examiner
BEKKER, KELLY JO
Art Unit
1792
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Sio Valley Technologies, INC.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
16%
Grant Probability
At Risk
1-2
OA Rounds
4y 2m
To Grant
72%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 16% of cases
16%
Career Allow Rate
64 granted / 409 resolved
-49.4% vs TC avg
Strong +56% interview lift
Without
With
+56.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 2m
Avg Prosecution
73 currently pending
Career history
482
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
42.0%
+2.0% vs TC avg
§102
15.1%
-24.9% vs TC avg
§112
33.0%
-7.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 409 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Drawings The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "508" and "512" have both been used to designate adding water- see instant specification paragraph 63. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: Figure 5, Reference Character 514 Mix. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Objections Claims 2 and 13 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 2 and 13 twice recite “and”. This appears to be a typographical error meant to recite “a”. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 8-11 and 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claims 8-11 and 15-18 recite the concentration percentage of various ingredients, however, no distinction has been made as to how the concentration is being measured. For example, it is unclear as to if the concentration is measured by weight or by volume. In amending the claims, applicant is reminded that support must be found in the disclosure as originally filed. Applicant is encouraged to cite the support in the response filed. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d): (d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph: Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. In the instant case claim 7 fails to further limit the claim from which it depends. Claim 7 requires that the acetyl triacylglycerol is an oil derived from a least one of a plant belonging to the Celastraceae family, however, claim 1 already requires this with the amendments limiting the oil to one derived from Gymnosporia senegalensis, Loeseneriella Africana, Mystroxylon aethiopicum, or Cassine burkeana which are all in the Celastraceae family. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1, 3-5, 12, and 14 are allowed. The closest prior art of record, LiquidSeal (WO 2020/226495) teaches a food preservative coating comprising: a diglyceride including those with palmitate chains; an emulsifier including lecithin; plant oil; and water (abstract, claims 1, 4, 8, 12 and 16, page 8 lines 31-35, and page 14 lines 10-12 and 20-24). LiquidSeal is silent to the composition as comprising an antiseptic and an acetyl triacylglycerol comprising a plant oil, wherein the plant oil comprises at least one of Gymnosporia senegalensis, Loeseneriella Africana, Mystroxylon aethiopicum, or Cassine burkeana. Although Duponet (WO 2017/005931) teaches motivation for the use of an acetyl triacylglycerol for providing hardness while retaining strong protection (claim 1 and page 4 lines 27-31), and Pareja et al (WO 2011/082253) teaches motivation for the use of an antiseptic (paragraph 21 and claim 1), the prior art alone or in combination does not teach or suggest the composition as comprising an acetyl triacylglycerol comprising a plant oil, wherein the plant oil comprises at least one of Gymnosporia senegalensis, Loeseneriella Africana, Mystroxylon aethiopicum, or Cassine burkeana as recited in independent claims 1 and 12. Claims 2 and 13 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the objections noted above, and claims 7-11 and 15-18 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112(a), set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KELLY BEKKER whose telephone number is (571)272-2739. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-3:30pm. 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, Erik Kashnikow can be reached at 571-270-3475. 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. KELLY BEKKER Primary Patent Examiner Art Unit 1792 /KELLY J BEKKER/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1792
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 08, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 28, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Mar 31, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12575588
Natural Pet Chew Product and Method of Manufacture
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12490753
VEGAN ALTERNATIVE TO CHEESE (II)
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 09, 2025
Patent 11109609
NON-DAIRY HIGH-DENSITY KOSHER FROZEN DESSERT PRODUCT AND PROCESS THEREFOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 07, 2021
Patent 11051539
LOW SODIUM SALT SUBSTITUTE WITH POTASSIUM CHLORIDE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jul 06, 2021
Patent 10980264
THERMALLY INHIBITED AGGLOMERATED STARCH
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 20, 2021
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
16%
Grant Probability
72%
With Interview (+56.0%)
4y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 409 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month