DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The status of the claims stands as follows:
Pending claims: 1-15
Withdrawn claims: 14-15
Claims currently under consideration: 1-13
Currently rejected claims: 1-13
Allowed claims: None
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 1-13) in the reply filed on 02/10/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 14-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 02/10/2026. However, regarding Applicant’s request to examine all pending claims due to claims 14 and 15 now depending from claim 1 as written in the amendment filed 02/10/2026, the restriction due to lack of unity of invention as described in the Restriction requirement filed 12/10/2025 is still applicable to the present claims. Therefore, the claims remain restricted as written therein and only claims 1-13 will be examined.
Applicant is reminded that upon the cancelation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. A request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a) must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.76 that identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Interpretation
“Seasoned laver” will be interpreted as being laver that is: (A) subjected to heating (e.g., roasted, fried, grilled); (B) amorphous as opposed to sheet-shaped; and/or (C) in contact with a seasoning or flavoring per [19] of the present specification and per the understanding of the term “seasoned” in the field of the art.
“Moisture content” will be interpreted as being the moisture content of the laver in the laver snack per [47] of the present specification.
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.
Claim 9 is 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 (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 9 recites a weight ratio of 1:4 to 4:1 for the mixture of the seasoned laver, the solid supplementary ingredients, and the binder. It is unclear as to which combination of ingredients are being used to provide the weight ratio (e.g., Option #1 being the ratio of (a) the combined weights of seasoned laver and solid supplementary ingredients to (b) the weight of the binder; Option #2 being the ratio of (a) the seasoned laver to (b) the combined weights of solid supplementary ingredients and binder). Therefore, the claim is indefinite.
For the purpose of this examination, the claimed weight ratio will be interpreted as being the ratio of (a) the combined weights of seasoned laver and solid supplementary ingredients to (b) the weight of the binder wherein the weight ratio of (a) to (b) is from 1:4 to 4:1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3-9, and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee (KR 20200125794A; English translation relied on for citations).
Regarding claim 1, Lee teaches a laver snack (corresponding to black snack bar) comprising: (a) seasoned laver (corresponding to roasted laver); (b) a binder; and solid supplementary ingredients (corresponding to rice, beans, sesame seeds, cranberries, blueberries, and/or nuts) [0013], [0015], [0017], [0046], [0049], [0052]-[0053]. Lee teaches that the binder may comprise a combination of saccharides (corresponding to the saccharides found in marshmallow, oligosaccharides, honey, starch syrup, cassava, sorbitol, and/or maltodextrin) and a gelling agent (corresponding to cassava and/or oligosaccharides, and the gelatin found in marshmallow) [0013], ]0049], [0053].
Regarding claim 3, Lee teaches the invention as described above in claim 1, including the gelling agent is gelatin (corresponding to the gelatin found in marshmallow) [0013, [0049], [0053].
Regarding claim 4, Lee teaches the invention as described above in claim 1, including the gelling agent is cassava powder [0035]; and that the snack comprises 3.7 parts by weight of cassava powder based on 100 parts by weight of the laver snack (corresponding to 39 parts by weight cassava based on 1064 parts by weight of total ingredients in the snack) [0046], [0049], [0053]. This concentration falls within the claimed concentration of gelling agent.
Regarding claim 5, Lee teaches the invention as described above in claim 1, including the saccharides are any one or more selected from the group consisting of sucrose (corresponding to the sucrose in marshmallows and honey), starch syrup, maltose, glucose (corresponding to the maltose and glucose found in honey), and sorbitol [0013], [0049], [0053].
Regarding claim 6, Lee teaches the invention as described above in claim 1, including the saccharides are oligosaccharide; and that the snack comprises 29.9 parts by weight of oligosaccharide based on 100 parts by weight of the laver snack (corresponding to 318 parts by weight oligosaccharide based on 1064 parts by weight of total ingredients in the snack) [0046], [0049], [0053]. This concentration falls within the claimed concentration of saccharides.
Regarding claims 7 and 8, Lee teaches the invention as described above in claim 1, including the solid supplementary ingredients are dried grains (corresponding to puffed rice) as recited in present claim 7; and that the snack comprises 9.4 parts by weight of dried grains based on total 100 parts by weight of the laver snack (corresponding to 100 parts by weight puffed rice based on 1064 parts by weight of total ingredients in the snack) [0046], [0049], [0053]. This concentration falls within the claimed concentration of solid supplementary ingredients recited in present claim 8.
Regarding claim 9, Lee teaches the invention as described above in claim 1, including the ratio of (a) the combined weights of seasoned laver and solid supplementary ingredients to (b) the weight of the binder provides a weight ratio of (a) to (b) of from 1:1 to 1:5 [0020], such as 1:2.9 (corresponding to the combination of the puffed rice, black beans, sesame seeds laver, cranberries, and blueberries comprising 275 parts by weight of the laver snack; and the combination of the butter, marshmallow, oligosaccharide, honey, and cassava comprising 789 parts by weight of the laver snack) [0046], [0049], [0053] . This weight ratio falls within the claimed weight ratio.
Regarding claims 11, 12, and 13, Lee teaches the invention as described above in claim 1, including the laver snack has a springiness of 69% (corresponding to a springiness of 0.69±0.08); a hardness of 28,477.52 g (corresponding to a hardness of 28477.52±7459.39); and a cohesiveness of 0.49 (corresponding to a cohesiveness of 0.49±0.09) ([0078], Example 2 on Day 0 in Table 2). These values fall within the ranges recited by present claims 11, 12, and 13.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Na (KR 20180038816A; IDS citation; English translation relied on for citations).
Regarding claim 1, Na teaches a laver snack (corresponding to seaweed snack) comprising: (a) seasoned laver (corresponding to fire-dried seaweed); (b) a binder comprising saccharides and a gelling agent (corresponding to starch and/or tapioca which are both saccharides and gelling agents; and gelatin which is a gelling agent); and (c) solid supplementary ingredients (corresponding to pepper, chicken powder, shrimp powder, anchovy powder, and/or sesame seeds) [0001], [0006], [0020], [0018].
Regarding claim 2, Na teaches the invention as described above in claim 1, including the seasoned laver is stone laver (abstract).
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.
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 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (KR 20200125794A; English translation relied on for citations) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Cho (Cho et al., “Health Functionality and Quality Control of Laver (Porphyra, Pyropia): Current Issues and Future Perspectives as an Edible Seaweed”, 2019, Marine Drugs, 18, 14, doi:10.3390/md18010014).
Regarding claim 10, Lee teaches the invention as described above in claim 1, including the seasoned laver is roasted dried raw laver [0017]; and that the laver is combined with binder ingredients such as honey and starch syrup [0019]. Honey and starch syrup contain water and honey is a humectant. Therefore, honey and starch syrup have the ability to increase moisture content of the composition in which they are included.
Lee does not teach that the laver in the laver snack has a moisture content of at least 5 wt.%.
However, Cho teaches that primary dried, secondary dried, roasted, and seasoned laver may have a maximum moisture content of 14 wt.%, 7 wt.%, 5 wt.%, and 5 wt.%., respectively (page 5, paragraph under section 2.2). These values provided ranges of moisture content which overlap the claimed moisture content. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to select any portions of the disclosed ranges including the instantly claimed ranges from the ranges disclosed in the prior art references, particularly in view of the fact that; "The normal desire of scientists or artisans to improve upon what is already generally known provides the motivation to determine where in a disclosed set percentage ranges is the optimum combination of percentages" In re Peterson 65 USPQ2d 1379 (CAFC 2003). Also In re Malagari, 182 USPQ 549,533 (CCPA 1974) and MPEP 2144.05.I.
It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the laver in the laver snack of Lee to have a moisture content as taught by Cho. Since Lee teaches that its seasoned laver is roasted dried raw laver [0017], but does not disclose a moisture content of the laver, a skilled practitioner would have been motivated to consult an additional reference such as Cho in order to determine a suitable moisture content for such laver. Furthermore, the practitioner would recognize that, by combining the seasoned laver with ingredients that may increase the moisture content of laver in the laver snack, the moisture content of the laver in the laver snack may be above the moisture contents recited in Cho. For these reasons, the combination of prior art renders the claimed moisture content obvious.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kelly Kershaw whose telephone number is (571)272-2847. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 9:00 am - 4:00 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, Nikki 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.
/KELLY P KERSHAW/Examiner, Art Unit 1791