Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 18/608,783

PRODUCTION OF LEGUME-BASED NUTRIENT-DENSE DOUGHS AND FOOD PRODUCTS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Mar 18, 2024
Examiner
CHAWLA, JYOTI
Art Unit
1791
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Antithesis Foods INC.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
52%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 10m
To Grant
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 52% of resolved cases
52%
Career Allow Rate
432 granted / 824 resolved
-12.6% vs TC avg
Strong +34% interview lift
Without
With
+33.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 10m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
857
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
54.3%
+14.3% vs TC avg
§102
9.3%
-30.7% vs TC avg
§112
26.8%
-13.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 824 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim(s) 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Berios, (US 20080145483 A1), hereinafter D1 in view of US 20100151099 A1 to Kasemzadeh, hereinafter D2. Regarding claims 1 and 15 D1 teaches a method for making a crunchy food (para 71), said method comprising the steps of: (i) homogenization of dry feed powders, including textured pulse protein powder; (ii) mixing and hydration of dry feed powders with water and fat to form a dough; (iii) forming of said dough into a form factor; (iv) drying and expansion; and (v) cooling into a crunchy aerated matrix (Para 52-54, 56, 57-58, 63-64 and 67-68 where D1 method steps and mixing etc., to form a dough or extrusion ready mix (claims 1-2 and 4). D1 also teaches legume flour, sugar, and fats and oils as recited in claims (see para 55 where fat, sugar and legume flour, protein etc., and para 22 where peanut as the source of legume mass is taught). D1 also teaches fiber (para 51 and 55). The method of claim 1 and 15 further comprising the step of: (vi) application of topical seasonings Para 58 where spices and examples where salt is taught). D1 teaches a method of claim 1 wherein the dry feed powders also include chemical leavening agents (para 107-109). Regarding the milled product as recited in claims 2-3, 5-6, 8-9, 11, 13-14, which are directed to a milled product and specifically hammer milled product, applicant is referred to para 79 where milling and specifically hammer milling is taught. Further regarding the particle sizes and sieve sizes as recited in claims 11 and 12, para 79 of D1 further teaches obtaining different particle sizes. D1 further teaches means of reducing particle size to a desired value at least based on the type of flour or product desired. Further, hammer milled as taught by D1 is further processed using an extruder to achieve particle sizes in the claimed range (see para 79-80 and table f 1 for detailed sizes) Regarding the specific step of creating a dough, D2 teaches dough creation prior to extrusion (D2 abstract). Both the limitations, .e., creating dough before extrusion and creating the crisp product was known at the time of the effective filing date of the invention (as taught by D2 abstract and specifically para 72). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify D1 and create a crisp snack product from the mix of claims 1, 4, or 7 as taught by D1 to form the dough preform before making the crisp snack at least on the available equipment and the intended finished product. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JYOTI CHAWLA whose telephone number is (571)272-8212. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30- 5:30. 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 Dees can be reached on 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. /JYOTI CHAWLA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1791
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 18, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Apr 02, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12575586
HYDROUS OILY FOOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12568988
CHOCOLATE PRODUCTS, INGREDIENTS, PROCESSES AND USES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12564201
PLANT-BASED TEXTURED BASE MATERIAL, AND PRODUCT CONTAINING REPLICA MEAT OBTAINED BY PROCESSING SAID BASE MATERIAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12557824
SYSTEMS FOR PROVIDING SMOKE FLAVOR TO A FOOD ARTICLE OR BEVERAGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12550922
Extruded Gelling Food Products, Extruded Gelling Food Product Ingredients, and Methods for Making Extruded Gelling Food Products and Extruded Food Product Ingredients
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
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
52%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+33.9%)
3y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 824 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