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 .
Response to Amendment
This action is in response to the amendment filed on 4/29/2026. Claims 16, 18, 20, 22, and 30 are amended, new claims 40-42 have been added, and claims 8-14, 19, 21, 26-29, and 31-39 are canceled. Claims 16-18, 20, 22-25, 30, and 40-42 are examined below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 16-18, 20, 22-25, 30, and 40-42 are rejected under 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because they are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Claim 16 recites (additional limitations crossed out):
A method of improving sleep and/or subsequent behavioral outcomes of an individual in need thereof, the method comprising:
providing a dietary recommendation by evaluating a parameter of the individual selected from the group consisting of falling asleep time, sleep duration, sleep onset latency, wakeafter sleep onset, sleep efficiency, gender, age, body mass index, physical activity level, glycemic status, food preference, food sensitivity, caloric intake, nutrients, meal glycemic load, time of consumption and combinations thereof, wherein the dietary recommendation comprises a sleep-enhancing evening meal to be consumed with a nutritional composition;
providing the nutritional composition and the sleep-enhancing evening meal based on the dietary recommendation; and
wherein the nutritional composition is a combination of a second composition comprising tryptophan, and a third composition comprising mulberry leaf extract, wherein the amount of the tryptophan and the amount of the mulberry leaf extract is effective to promote better sleep quality in the individual, and wherein the administering of the nutritional composition and the sleep-enhancing evening meal improves sleep and/or subsequent behavioral outcomes of the individual.
The above limitations as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation covers managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people. That is nothing in the claim precludes the steps as being described as managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people. For example, the limitations describe a method for providing a dietary recommendation by evaluating a parameter of an individual, providing a nutritional composition and sleep-enhancing evening meal based on the dietary recommendation, and administering the nutritional composition and sleep-enhancing evening meal. This is merely the application of a natural relationship (i.e., conventional sleep-inducing compounds) using routine nutrition advice. The limitations describe the management of personal behavior. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, describes managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people, then it falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activities” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claims feature the additional element of “administering the nutritional composition and the sleep-enhancing evening meal to the individual”. However, this limitation merely applies the recommended nutritional composition and sleep-enhancing evening meal.
Accordingly, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. More specifically, the additional elements fail to include (1) improvements to the functioning of a computer or to any other technology or technical field (see MPEP 2106.05(a)), (2) applying or using a judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition (see Vanda memo), (3) applying the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine (see MPEP 2106.05(b)), (4) effecting a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing (see MPEP 2106.05(c)), or (5) applying or using the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception (see MPEP 2106.05(e) and Vanda memo).
Rather, the limitations merely add the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(f)) or generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (see MPEP 2106.05(h)), particularly as it relates to the recited “administering” step. This is not sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claims are therefore still directed to an abstract idea.
Claim 30 features limitations similar to those of claim 16, but for the limitation “order a nutritional composition based on the dietary recommendation” instead of the “providing a nutritional composition…” and “administering the nutritional composition…” limitations of claim 16, and is also directed to the same abstract idea. However, claim 30 features the additional element of a “non-transitory computer-readable medium” and a “device” to perform the steps. These additional elements are recited at a high level of generality (see at least Page 25) such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computing components. Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Claim 30 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of a “non-transitory computer-readable medium” and a “device” to perform the claimed steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using generic computer components cannot provide an inventive concept. Therefore, the claim 30 is not found to be patent eligible.
Claims 17-18, 20, 22-25, and 40-42 are dependent on claim 16, and include all the limitations of claim 16. Therefore, they are also found to be directed to an abstract idea. The dependent claims have not been found to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application, or provide significantly more than the abstract idea since they merely further narrow the abstract idea. Therefore, the dependent claims are found to be directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 16-18, 20, 22-25, 30, and 40-42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, 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.
Regarding claims 16 and 30, the limitation “wherein the nutritional composition is a combination of a second composition comprising tryptophan and a third composition comprising mulberry leaf extract…” is indefinite. This limitation makes mention of a second and third composition without mentioning a first composition. The Examiner suggests amending the claim to state “wherein the nutritional composition is a combination of ”
The term “sleep enhancing evening meal” in claims 16 and 30 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The terms “sleep-enhancing” and “evening” are not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For example, a meal that causes one to sleep longer may not be considered as “sleep-enhancing” to one that suffers from over-sleeping. Further, the term “evening” may have various meanings (ex., after dusk, after dinner, after 5:00 PM, after 6:00 PM, or the period between noon and 5:00 PM (in some Southern US areas)).
Dependent claims are rejected as well since they inherit the limitations of the independent claims.
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.
Claim(s) 16-17, 20, 22, 24, 25, and 40-42 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hardee (US 2017/0148348) in view of “Sleep benefits: Nestle China’s new milk powder for adult contains mulberry leaf extract, tryptophan” by Tingmin Koe, available March 19, 2024, hereinafter referred to as Koe1.
Regarding claim 16, Hardee discloses A method of improving sleep and/or subsequent behavioral outcomes of an individual in need thereof, the method comprising:
providing a dietary recommendation by evaluating a parameter of the individual selected from the group consisting of falling asleep time, sleep duration, sleep onset latency, wakeafter sleep onset, sleep efficiency, gender, age, body mass index, physical activity level, glycemic status, food preference, food sensitivity, caloric intake, nutrients, meal glycemic load, time of consumption and combinations thereof, wherein the dietary recommendation comprises a sleep-enhancing evening meal to be consumed with a nutritional composition (See at least Para. [0011] – “Data that can be input into or monitored by the wearable electronic device (e.g., via its sensors) can also be received as input by the wearable electronic device from external electronic devices (e.g., the user's smartphone). For instance, the user's exercise activity can be manually entered, calculated and/or monitored by the wearable electronic device, or the user's exercise activity can be wirelessly received as input from the user's smartphone. Exercise activity can include the type and quantity of exercise ( e.g., run 5 miles, 50 sit ups, 100 jumping jacks, 20 pushups, etc.). The wearable electronic device can measure the user's movements, duration of the movements, intensity of the movements, and/or heart rate.”, Claim 1 – “ receiving input from at least one of a sensor and an interface of a wearable electronic device of a user, the input including physiological factors and environmental factors measured by the wearable electronic device; predicting at least one nutritional deficiency with a processor, the at least one nutritional deficiency being predicted based on the input;”, and Claim 6 – “The method according to claim 1, further comprising generating a meal recipe for the user, the meal recipe including a list of ingredients and instructions for preparing a meal, the meal recipe being generated with the processor based on the at least one nutritional deficiency.”)
providing the nutritional composition and the sleep-enhancing evening meal based on the dietary recommendation, (See at least Para. [0023] – “The meal recipe can be generated based on the nutritional deficiency. The meal recipe can substitute new ingredients (with added health benefits, such as antioxidants) for something the user already has on his or her menu, or suggest different recipes. The processor 140 can also generate a dietary plan for the user, the dietary plan can include a list of meal recipes for at least one week. The dietary plan can be generated based on the nutritional deficiency. Additionally, the processor 140 can also generate a food additive for the user, the food additive can include a list of ingredients and instructions for preparing an additive to be added to food. The food additive (e.g., Vitamin A) can be generated based on the nutritional deficiency. Additives can include ingredients with known benefits for the use.
Hardee does not explicitly disclose administering the nutritional composition and the sleep-enhancing evening meal to the individual, wherein the nutritional composition is a combination of a second composition comprising tryptophan and a third composition comprising mulberry leaf extract, wherein the amount of the tryptophan and the amount of the mulberry leaf extract is effective to promote better sleep quality in the individual, and wherein the administering of the nutritional composition and the sleep-enhancing evening meal improves sleep and/or subsequent behavioral outcomes of the individual. (See Koe – “During the RCT, the intervention group took the powder blend drink containing 0.75g mulberry leaf extract and 120mg of tryptophan with dinner about four hours before bed.” It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Hardee to utilize the teachings of Koe since they are both in the same field of endeavor (i.e., supplementation to improve sleep quality), and all of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. The Examiner further notes that the language “wherein the amount of the tryptophan and the amount of the mulberry leaf extract is effective to promote better sleep quality in the individual, and wherein the administering of the nutritional composition and the sleep-enhancing evening meal improves sleep and/or subsequent behavioral outcomes of the individual” merely expresses the intended result of the process and lacks patentable weight (See MPEP 2111.04)
Regarding claim 17, Hardee does not explicitly disclose The method of Claim 16, wherein the dietary recommendation comprises a recommendation for a meal comprising a nutrient selected from the group consisting of magnesium, zinc, tryptophan, B-vitamins, melatonin, glycine, protein, healthy fats, omega 3, fiber and combinations thereof. (see Claim 7 – “Nutritional composition according to any one of the preceding claims, wherein said composition further comprises one or more of magnesium, zinc, vitamin B3 and vitamin B6, preferably wherein said composition comprises magnesium, zinc, vitamin B3 and vitamin B6.”
Regarding claim 20, Hardee does not explicitly disclose The method of Claim 16, wherein the nutritional composition is administered to the individual concurrently with consumption of the sleep enhancing evening meal. (See Koe – “During the RCT, the intervention group took the powder blend drink containing 0.75g mulberry leaf extract and 120mg of tryptophan with dinner about four hours before bed.” It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to Hardee to utilize the teachings of Koe since they are both in the same field of endeavor (i.e., supplementation to improve sleep quality), and all of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.)
Regarding claim 22, Hardee discloses The method of Claim 16, wherein the individual is selected from the group consisting of a child, an adolescent, and an adult (see Para. [0011] – “Moreover, the wearable electronic device can calculate calories burned based on the measurements and stored user parameters, such as, for example, weight, height, age, body fat percentage, gender, etc.”)
Regarding claim 24, Hardee discloses The method of Claim 16, wherein the dietary recommendation includes a single day meal plan. (See claim 7 – “The method according to 6, further comprising generating a dietary plan for the user, the dietary plan including a list of meal recipes for at least one week, the dietary plan being generated with the processor based on the at least one nutritional deficiency.”)
Regarding claim 25, Hardee discloses The method of Claim 16, wherein the dietary recommendation includes a multi-day meal plan. (See claim 7 – “The method according to 6, further comprising generating a dietary plan for the user, the dietary plan including a list of meal recipes for at least one week, the dietary plan being generated with the processor based on the at least one nutritional deficiency.”)
Regarding claim 40, Hardee discloses the method of claim 16, further comprising identifying the individual as having a sleep complaint. (See at least Para. [0013] – “Details of the user's sleep, such as time of sleep and time of awake can be entered into the wearable electronic device. Numerous factors can contribute to poor sleep, including vitamin and mineral deficiencies. Melatonin is both a hormone and an antioxidant; a magnesium deficiency can cause insomnia; lack of potassium can lead to difficulty staying asleep throughout the night; and, a vitamin D deficiency has been linked to excessive daytime sleepiness. In at least one embodiment, one or more motion sensors (e.g., actigraph, accelerometer) in the wearable electronic device identifies tossing and turning during the night, which can indicate poor sleep. The wearable electronic device can also identify the behavior of the user after a poor night's sleep (e.g., sluggishness, metabolic differences, drinking more coffee, eating more sweets).”
Regarding claim 41, Hardee discloses the method of claim 16, wherein the individual is an individual having a sleep complaint. (See Para. [0013])
Regarding claim 42, Hardee does not explicitly disclose The method of Claim 16, wherein the amount of the tryptophan in the nutritional composition is 120 mg to 5 g tryptophan and/or the amount of the mulberry leaf extract in the nutritional composition is 400 mg to 800 mg. (See Koe – “During the RCT, the intervention group took the powder blend drink containing 0.75g mulberry leaf extract and 120mg of tryptophan with dinner about four hours before bed.” It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to Hardee to utilize the teachings of Koe since they are both in the same field of endeavor (i.e., supplementation to improve sleep quality), and all of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.)
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hardee (US 2017/0148348) in view of “Sleep benefits: Nestle China’s new milk powder for adult contains mulberry leaf extract, tryptophan” by Tingmin Koe, available March 19, 2024, hereinafter referred to as Koe, and in further view of “Effects of Mulberry Leaf Extract Rich in 1-Deoxynojirimycin on Blood Lipid Profiles in Humans” by Yoshihiro Kojima, published August 6, 2010, hereinafter referred to as Kojima2.
Regarding claim 18, Hardee and Koe do not explicitly disclose the method of Claim 16, wherein the nutritional composition is administered to the individual at a predetermined time before consumption of the sleep-enhancing evening meal. (See Kojima, Page 1 – “The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of DNJ-rich mulberry leaf extract on plasma lipid profiles in humans. An open-label, single-group study was conducted in 10 subjects with initial serum triglyceride (TG) level ≥200 mg/dl. Subjects ingested capsules containing DNJ-rich mulberry leaf extract at 12 mg three times daily before meals for 12 weeks. Our findings showed a modest decrease in serum TG level and beneficial changes in the lipoprotein profile following 12-week administration of DNJ-rich mulberry leaf extract. No significant changes in hematological or biochemical parameters were observed during the study period; no adverse events associated with DNJ-rich mulberry leaf extract occurred.” It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Hardee and Koe to utilize the teachings of Kojima since they are all in the same field of endeavor (i.e., analysis of effects of supplementation on health), and all of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hardee (US 2017/0148348) in view of “Sleep benefits: Nestle China’s new milk powder for adult contains mulberry leaf extract, tryptophan” by Tingmin Koe, available March 19, 2024, hereinafter referred to as Koe, and in further view of Grimmer (US 2018/0240542)
Regarding claim 23, Hardee and Koe do not explicitly disclose The method of Claim 16, wherein the dietary recommendation is adapted to an individual preference selected from the group consisting of vegan, vegetarian, lactose-free, gluten-free and combination thereof. (See Grimmer, Para. [0202] – “In some embodiments, preference filter 1540 is applied to deprioritize foods that does not comply with a user's preference (e.g., vegetarian, dairy-free, gluten free, kosher, etc.). In some embodiments, the system removes a food that does not comply with a user's preference from a list of eligible foods for the user.” It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Hardee and Koe to utilize the teachings of Grimmer so that the suggested meals may address any dietary restrictions of the user.)
Claim(s) 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hardee (US 2017/0148348) in view of “Sleep benefits: Nestle China’s new milk powder for adult contains mulberry leaf extract, tryptophan” by Tingmin Koe, available March 19, 2024, hereinafter referred to as Koe, and “Instacart and PlateJoy Partner to Make Personalized Nutrition Real for All” by PlateJoy, Inc., available May 4, 2016, hereinafter referred to as Platejoy3.
Regarding claim 30, Hardee discloses A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing a program for improving sleep and/or subsequent behavioral outcomes of an individual in need thereof, that causes a device to:
provide a dietary recommendation by evaluating a parameter of the individual selected from the group consisting of falling asleep time, sleep duration, sleep onset latency, wakeafter sleep onset, sleep efficiency, gender, age, body mass index, physical activity level, glycemic status, food preference, food sensitivity, caloric intake, nutrients, meal glycemic load, time of consumption and combinations thereof, wherein the dietary recommendation comprises a sleep-enhancing evening meal to be consumed with a nutritional composition (“Data that can be input into or monitored by the wearable electronic device (e.g., via its sensors) can also be received as input by the wearable electronic device from external electronic devices (e.g., the user's smartphone). For instance, the user's exercise activity can be manually entered, calculated and/or monitored by the wearable electronic device, or the user's exercise activity can be wirelessly received as input from the user's smartphone. Exercise activity can include the type and quantity of exercise ( e.g., run 5 miles, 50 sit ups, 100 jumping jacks, 20 pushups, etc.). The wearable electronic device can measure the user's movements, duration of the movements, intensity of the movements, and/or heart rate.”, Claim 1 – “ receiving input from at least one of a sensor and an interface of a wearable electronic device of a user, the input including physiological factors and environmental factors measured by the wearable electronic device; predicting at least one nutritional deficiency with a processor, the at least one nutritional deficiency being predicted based on the input;”, and Claim 6 – “The method according to claim 1, further comprising generating a meal recipe for the user, the meal recipe including a list of ingredients and instructions for preparing a meal, the meal recipe being generated with the processor based on the at least one nutritional deficiency.”)
Hardee does not disclose order the nutritional composition and the sleep-enhancing evening meal based on the dietary recommendation, (See PlateJoy – “PlateJoy has spent three years developing the technology that turns an individual's nutrition data into ultra-personalized weekly menus. Backed by Y-Combinator in 2015, the company uses over 50 data points about your preferences and health goals to determine exactly what you should be eating, with recipes and shopping lists tailored to each customer.”, and “Starting today, the company can go one giant leap further: your custom groceries can be ordered 7 days a week via Instacart's one-hour delivery service in over 20 metro areas.” It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Hardee to utilize the teachings of PlateJoy since it would provide users with access to the recommended meals/additives of Hardee.)
Hardee and PlateJoy do not explicitly disclose wherein the nutritional composition is selected from the group consisting of a second composition comprising tryptophan and a third composition comprising mulberry leaf extract, wherein the amount of the tryptophan and the amount of the mulberry leaf extract is effective to promote better sleep quality in the individual, and wherein the administering of the nutritional composition and the sleep-enhancing evening meal improves sleep and/or subsequent behavioral outcomes of the individual. (See Koe – “During the RCT, the intervention group took the powder blend drink containing 0.75g mulberry leaf extract and 120mg of tryptophan with dinner about four hours before bed.” It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Hardee and Platejoy to utilize the teachings of Koe since Hardee and Koe are in the same field of endeavor (i.e., supplementation to improve sleep quality), and all of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. The Examiner further notes that the language “wherein the amount of the tryptophan and the amount of the mulberry leaf extract is effective to promote better sleep quality in the individual, and wherein the administering of the nutritional composition and the sleep-enhancing evening meal improves sleep and/or subsequent behavioral outcomes of the individual” merely expresses the intended result of the process and lacks patentable weight (See MPEP 2111.04))
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments regarding claims rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues with substance:
Applicant argues that the claims effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition. This is not persuasive because the claims do not present a disease or medical condition to be treated. Further, the claims merely recite an intended result without 1) identifying what particular condition is being treated, 2) providing any specific algorithms detailing how the dietary recommendation is determined, or 3) providing any concrete meal structures (i.e., what is a sleep-enhancing meal comprised of). In other words, the claims do not feature a specific compound to treat a specific condition. If anything, the claims merely feature the administration of an undisclosed composition to introduce an undisclosed “improvement “ to sleep and behavioral outcomes. Therefore, the claims do not feature a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition.
Applicant's arguments regarding claims rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered but are moot due to the application additional prior art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
“Impact of Tea Processing on Tryptophan, Melatonin, Phenolic and Flavonoid Contents in Mulberry (Morus alba L.) Leaves: Quantitative Analysis by LC-MS/MS” by Panyada Panyatip, published August 15, 20224 indicates that tryptophan is found in mulberry leaf extract.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYLE G ROBINSON whose telephone number is (571)272-9261. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 7:00 - 4:30 EST; Friday 7:00-11:00 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, Kambiz Abdi can be reached at 571-272-6702. 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.
/KYLE G ROBINSON/Examiner, Art Unit 3685
/KAMBIZ ABDI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3685
1 Available at https://www.nutraingredients.com/Article/2024/03/19/Nestle-China-launches-sleep-aid-milk-powder-formulated-with-mulberry-leaf-extract-tryptophan/
2 Available at https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2935155/pdf/jcbn-47-155.pdf
3 Available at https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/instacart-and-platejoy-partner-to-make-personalized-nutrition-real-for-all-300262652.html
4 Available at https://www.mdpi.com/1420-3049/27/15/4979
Prosecution Insights