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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group II, claims 7-17 in the reply filed on February 27, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the grounds that Tsukioka et al. does not teach the special technical feature which is not merely the use of methylcellulose but rather the use of methylcellulose having a specific viscosity between 100cP and 1000 cP, as measured in a 2% by weight solution under specific conditions. This is not found persuasive because Tsukioka et al. teach edible films comprising methyl cellulose as the film former. Given Tsukioka et al. teaches methyl cellulose generally, there reference is considered to teach the entire viscosity range possible for methyl cellulose. No criticality with respect to viscosity is taught by Tsukioka et al.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 1-6 and 18-22 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on February 27, 2026.
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.
Claims 7-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Simon (US 2010/0055280) in view of Dow (“METHOCEL Cellulose Ethers, Technical Handbook”, Form No. 192-01062-0902 AMS, September 2002, pp. 1-30).
Regarding claims 7 and 8, Simon discloses a spice-containing film comprised of a carrier film comprising a polymer which is water-soluble; and a coating of spice particles (Abstract, [0019], [0027]). Simon discloses the polymer is selected from a group comprising cellulose derivatives including methyl cellulose ([0025]-[0027]).
Simon discloses the carrier film has a smooth bottom side and a top side opposite this (i.e., a layer) which is provided with a coating of spice particles (a layer of spice on the carrier film-[0019]).
While Simon discloses a water soluble polymer, methyl cellulose, the reference is completely silent with respect to viscosity.
Dow teaches commercial methyl cellulose, METHOCEL A, is available in a range of viscosity grades ( 3 to 100,000 mPa·s (i.e., cP) 2% solution measured at 20°C-p. 1/Viscosity Grades, p. 18/Table 7). Dow teaches the methyl cellulose products form clear, tough and flexible films (p. 3/Film formation). Dow teaches high-strength, water-soluble film may be rolled, case or extruded from the methyl cellulose products (p. 26/Properties of Films of METHOCEL Cellulose Ethers) Dow teach the need for a plasticizer may be more pertinent when using low viscosity, 5 mPa·s (i.e., cP) methyl cellulose because of lower film elongation properties (p. 26/Properties of Films of METHOCEL Cellulose Ethers, Table 9).
Simon and Dow are combinable because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, films formed with methyl cellulose. Given Dow teaches methyl cellulose is available in a range of viscosity grades and that methyl cellulose is known to produce clear, tough and flexible films, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have used a methyl cellulose product within the available viscosity grades, including a methyl cellulose which exhibits a viscosity of 400 mPa·s (i.e., cP)(measured in a solution of 2% by weight at 20°C) to produce the spice-containing film of Simon with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claims 9 and 10, modified Simon discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Simon discloses the carrier film may comprises combinations of water-soluble polymer (polymer different from methyl cellulose-[0017], [0026]). Simon discloses the water-soluble polymer is selected from the group consisting of pullulan, xanthan gum, chitosan, alginate, dextrin, pectin and modified starch.
Regarding claims 11 and 12, modified Simon discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Simon discloses the carrier film also comprises a softener or humectant (i.e., plasticizer)([0017]). Simon discloses substances that are suitable as softeners or humectants include glycerin, sorbitol and propylene glycol ([0017]).
Regarding claims 13 and 14, modified Simon discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Simon disclose the spice-containing film may be coated (i.e., additional layer of polysaccharide) with adhesive as aroma protection or for improving the adherence of the spice particles to the surface of foods ([0042]). Simon discloses suitable substance for us in producing the coatings include flour, starch, maltodextrin, gum arabic, lecithin, alginate, carrageenan, gar agar, pectin, gelatin, casein, sugar alcohols, polyvinyl alcohol as well as mixture of two more of the adhesives ([0042]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have selected any combination of the adhesives, including maltodextrin and starch, and arrive at the present invention with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 15, modified Simon discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Simon is silent with respect to a layer of spices on the layer of adhesive.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to have added spice to the second layer of film to obtain a spice-containing film with a higher dose of spice.
Regarding claim 16, modified Simon discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Simon is silent with respect to water activity. However, given Simon et al. disclose an edible film comprising the claimed components, inherently the film would exhibit a water activity as presently claimed.
Regarding claim 17, modified Simon discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Simon discloses the spice-containing films has a thickness in the range of from 0.2 to 5mm (i.e., 200 to 5,000 microns). In the case where the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP §2144.05 I).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
-Matta et al. (“Active edible films of methylcellulose with extracts of green apple (Granny Smith) skin”, International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, Volume 124, (2019), pp. 1292-1298) teaches edible films of methylcellulose (METHOCEL A4M) having a viscosity of 4000 cP and impregnated with apple extract.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH A GWARTNEY whose telephone number is (571)270-3874. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9 a.m. - 5 p.m. EST.
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, Curtis Mayes can be reached at 571-272-1234. 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.
ELIZABETH A. GWARTNEY
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1759
/ELIZABETH GWARTNEY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Prosecution Insights