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 .
DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 8/19/2026 has been entered.
Claims 1-2, 4, 17-21, and 26 are pending. Claims 1-2, 4, 17-21, and 26 are examined on the merits.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Any rejection not reiterated below are hereby withdrawn.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (Claims 1-6) in the reply filed on Oct. 9, 2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 7-16 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on Oct. 9, 2025.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/31/25, 9/30/24 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 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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 17-21, and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Andrews (US 20060222682 A1) in view of Van Dyke et al. (US 20110217356 A1). This is a new rejection.
Andrews teaches moringa seed cake are used as a ground fertilizer [0013]. The nutraceutical composition of claim 24, wherein a percentage by weight of the fruit of the Moringa plant is approximately 1% to 20% of the total weight of the Moringa plant components (Claim 39).
However, Andrews does not teach about 1-2% keratin protein from feather or hair, keratoses, kerateines, soluble proteins, cleaves disulfide bonds, feather meals.
Van Dyke et al. teaches keratin composition comprises, consists of or consists essentially of a keratose, a kerateine, or combinations thereof. In some embodiments, the keratin composition comprises, consists of or consists essentially of acidic keratose, basic keratose, acidic kerateine, basic kerateine, or combinations thereof. In some embodiments, the keratin composition comprises, consists of or consists essentially of .alpha.-keratose, .gamma.-keratose, basic .alpha.-keratose, acidic .alpha.-keratose, basic .gamma.-keratose, acidic .gamma.-keratose, or combinations thereof. In some embodiments, the keratin composition comprises, consists of or consists essentially of .alpha.-kerateine, .gamma.-kerateine, basic .alpha.-kerateine, acidic .alpha.-kerateine, basic .gamma.-kerateine, acidic .gamma.-kerateine, or combinations thereof [0007]. The kerateine compositions are useful to provide a method of modulating the release of a compound of interest over time. Kerateine compositions may be designed or selected based on varying hydrolysis profiles over time to provide an appropriate release profile for the compound of interest [0009]. The keratin composition includes from 0.5, 1, 5, or 10 to 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 99 or 100% by weight of keratose, kerateine, or combinations thereof [0008]. Keratins are a family of proteins found in the hair, skin, and other tissues of vertebrates. Hair is a unique source of human keratins because it is one of the few human tissues that is readily available and inexpensive. Although other sources of keratins are acceptable feedstocks for the present invention, (e.g., wool, fur, horns, hooves, beaks, feathers, scales, and the like), human hair is preferred for use with human subjects because of its biocompatibility [0048]. The crosslinked structure of keratins is broken down by either oxidation or reduction. In these reactions, the disulfide bonds in cystine amino acid residues are cleaved, rendering the keratins soluble [0054].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use feather and hair with moringa because Van Dyke et al. teaches kerateine compositions are useful to provide a method of modulating the release of a compound of interest over time. Kerateine compositions may be designed or selected based on varying hydrolysis profiles over time to provide an appropriate release profile for the compound of interest [0009]. Andrews teaches moringa seed cake are used as a ground fertilizer [0013]. One would have been motivated to make fertilizer from morgina for the expected benefit of slow release of nutrients to the plants as taught by Van Dyke et al. Absent evidence to the contrary, there would have been a reasonable expectation of success in making the claimed invention from the combined teachings of the cited references.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use feather meal because Van Dyke et al. teaches the crosslinked structure of keratins is broken down by either oxidation or reduction. In these reactions, the disulfide bonds in cystine amino acid residues are cleaved, rendering the keratins soluble [0054]. One would have been motivated to make feather meals with increased surface area for the expected benefit of solubilizing the feather meal to extract soluble keratin as taught by Van Dyke et al. Absent evidence to the contrary, there would have been a reasonable expectation of success in making the claimed invention from the combined teachings of the cited references.
Conclusion
No claim is allowed.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CATHERYNE CHEN whose telephone number is (571)272-9947. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9-5:30 PM.
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, Anand U Desai can be reached on 571-272-0947. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
Catheryne Chen Examiner Art Unit 1655
/ANAND U DESAI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1655
Prosecution Insights