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 Interpretation
The following claim interpretations are herein presented to clarify on the record the limitations recited in each of the noted claims:
For independent claim 1, each recitation of “same” is interpreted as referring back to the type of starch material recited immediately previous to the respective recitations of “same”.
For claim 2, “the temperature of 6 temperature regions of the twin screw extruder is sequentially raised in the range of 35-1200 C is interpreted as reciting temperatures in the extruder rising sequentially from one to another of the regions, with a 1st of the regions being at a temperature of about 350 C and a 6th of the regions being at a temperature of about 1200 C, in view of the instant Specification at [0025, 0031, 0037 and 0060].
For claim 3, “common starch” is interpreted as referring to corn starch in view of such a description at the instant Specification at [0031-0032].
For claim 4, “conventional drying apparatus” is interpreted as referring to a drying apparatus operable to dry material at a temperature of between 40 and 50 degrees C in view of such a description at the instant Specification at [0017].
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.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
In claim 1, in part 1), “the fully gelatinized starch” lacks antecedent basis; and,
in part 2), it is unclear whether “the extrusion process” refers back to “primary extrusion” or “secondary extrusion”, thus lacks antecedent basis, “the mass concentration of the starch” also lacking antecedent basis, it being unclear what component(s) that “concentration” refers to, and “the precipitate” also lacking antecedent basis (‘precipitate resulting from water washing, and/or centrifuging?).
In claim 2, the claim is ambiguous as to whether temperatures of sequential ones of six temperature regions are elevated or raised with respect to adjacent temperature regions, or temperatures of all 6 of the regions are sequentially raised, and ambiguous as to whether each sequential raising of temperature is between 35 and 120 degrees C or a total raising of temperature is in a range of in between 35 and 120 degrees C.
In claim 3, the meaning of “common starch” is unclear, it being ambiguous as to whether “common” means an extent of lack of treatment, or instead refers to a type or source of starch such as from corn.
In each of claims 4 and 9, “conventional” referring to the “drying apparatus” is indefinite and ambiguous as to what is meant by “conventional”.
In claim 8, “the centrifugation step” lacks antecedent basis.
Allowable Subject Matter
Independent claim 1 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action.
Claim 1 would distinguish and be non-obvious over all of the prior art in view of recitation of A method for preparing type III resistant starch in an "extrusion-debranching" manner, comprising the following steps:
(1) adding a starch raw material into a twin screw extruder for primary extrusion, collecting fully gelatinized starch, and then drying and crushing same to obtain gelatinized starch; and
(2) fully mixing the gelatinized starch obtained in step (1) with pullulanase, adding the mixture into the twin screw extruder for secondary extrusion, wherein the water content of the material is set to be 40-60 wt% and the mass concentration of the starch is set to be 40-60%, in view of further recitation of:
performing debranching in the extrusion process, collecting the obtained debranched starch, then recrystallizing same, in combination with water washing and centrifuging same, and collecting the precipitate and drying same to obtain type III resistant starch.
The closest prior art constitutes Tian et al PGPUBS Document US 2020/0345046 (Tian), Shen et al PGPUBS Document US 2019/0169663 (Shen), Zimeri et al PGPUBS Document US 2007/0092620 (Zimeri), Haynes et al PGPUBS Document 2002/014649 (Haynes) and the Machine English translation of publication CN 112142865.
Tian and Shen individually disclose two step extrusion utilizing a twin-screw extruder accompanied by substeps of gelatinizing, drying, crushing or grinding and addition of pullulanase enzyme for at least one of the two steps of extrusion.
Zimeri, Haynes and CN ‘865 together teach a process of producing Type III resistant starch concerning debranching, extrusion , drying, crushing or grinding, washing, centrifuging and precipitating.
However no combination of the prior art teaches or suggests the method steps of combining the two steps of extrusion and later steps of washing, centrifuging, precipitation and drying with a substep of performing debranching in the extrusion, and collecting debranched starch material, then recrystallizing the starch material, followed by the steps of water washing, centrifuging, collecting precipitate and drying to obtain the Type III resistant starch product.
Claims 2-9 would distinguish and be non-obvious in view of their dependence on independent claim 1 which distinguishes and is non-obvious.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Primary Examiner Joseph Drodge at his direct government formal facsimile phone number telephone number of 571-272-1140. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from approximately 8:00 AM to 1:00PM and 2:30 PM to 5:30 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner are unsuccessful, the examiner' s supervisor, Benjamin Lebron, of Technology Center Unit 1773, can reached at 571-272-0475.
The telephone number, for official, formal communications, for the examining group where this application is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from the Patent Examiner. Unpublished application information in https:///www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https:///www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/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.
JWD
07/11/2026
/JOSEPH W DRODGE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1773
Prosecution Insights