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 without traverse of Group I (claims 16-24 and 49) in the reply filed on 08/06/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 25-48 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 08/06/2026.
Claim Interpretation
Examiner wishes to point out to Applicant that claim(s) 16-24 is/are directed towards an apparatus and as such will be examined under the following conditions. The process/manner of using the apparatus and/or the material worked upon by the apparatus is/are viewed as recitation(s) of intended use and is/are given patentable weight only to the extent that structure is added to the claimed apparatus (See MPEP 2114 II and 2115 for further details). For apparatuses, the claim limitations will define structural limitations (See MPEP 2114-2115) or functional limitations properly recited (See MPEP 2173.05 (g)). For example, the recitation “cellular material” is considered as material worked upon by the apparatus and it is viewed as recitation(s) of intended use.
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.
Claim 23 is 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.
Claim 23 recites “wherein the distributor unit and heat exchange unit are releasably provided at the exit of the extruder” which is indefinite. Claim 23 depend on claim 22, but claim 22 does not mention or interduce “a distributor unit”. As a result, claim 23 lack antecedent basis for the term “distributor unit”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 16-18, 24 and 49 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sharman (WO2020/079440 – of record).
Regarding claim 16, Sharman teaches an extrusion apparatus for producing a meat alternative product capable of being a device (a high moisture extrusion apparatus (100)) for the manufacture of a product that imitates properties of meat and fish and their role in diets (Abstract; Fig. 1; Page 1, lines 5-20), comprising
an extruder (102) and a cooling die (122) arranged downstream of the exit of the extruder, wherein an inlet port (114) capable for the insertion of cellular material (116) is provided in a region of the extruder in the vicinity of the extruder outlet to the outlet of the cooling die (see Figs. 1-3; Page 9, lines 7-10).
Regarding claim 17, Sharman further teaches the device, wherein the inlet port (114) is provided in a region which is in the last quarter of the extruder length in front of the extruder exit (106) (see Figs. 1-3).
Regarding claim 18, Sharman further teaches the device, wherein the inlet port (114) is provided between the exit of the extruder (102) and the outlet of the cooling die (122) (see Figs. 1-3).
Regarding claim 24, Sharman further teaches a system for the manufacture (a high moisture extrusion apparatus (100)) of a product that imitates properties of meat and fish and their role in diets, comprising a device according to claim 16 and at least one unit arranged downstream of the device for performing further processing steps (Fig. 4 depicts the extrusion apparatus (100) as part of a wider production line with downstream units) (see Page 10, lines 25-28).
Regarding claim 49, Sharman teaches a method for retrofitting an extruder so as to obtain a device according to claim 16, comprising the step of providing at the exit of the extruder either a cooling die(122) comprising an inlet port (114) for the insertion of cellular material, or a combination of a distributor unit comprising an inlet port for the insertion of cellular material and a cooling die (see Figs. 1-3; Page 9, lines 7-10).
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) 19 and 22-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sharman (WO2020/079440 - of record) as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of Klein (US 2021/0046690).
Regarding claim 19, Sharman teaches the device as discussed in claim 18 above.
Sharman does not teach wherein the inlet port is provided in a region of a distributor unit between the exit of the extruder and the cooling die, or in a region of the cooling die.
In the same field of endeavor, extrusion devices, Klein teaches a cooling tool (1) is in particular a cooling die for a food or an animal feed extruder (E), the cooling tool has an inlet end (3) connected to the extruder (see abstract; Figs. 1-2;[0010]); a distributor (15) with a distributor element (15a) (e.g., a cone), wherein the inlet port is provided in a region of the distributor unit between the exit of the extruder and the cooling die, or in a region of the cooling die (see Figs. 2-5; [0056-0060]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the apparatus as taught by Sharman in view of Klein with the inlet port is provided in a region of a distributor unit between the exit of the extruder and the cooling die, or in a region of the cooling die as such is known in the art of extrusion devices given the discussion of Klein above; and doing so is combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, with the added benefits of doing so would ensure uniform distribution of extrudate into the cooling die’s follow channels (see [0015] of Klein).
Regarding claim 22, Sharman teaches the device as discussed in claim 18 above.
Sharman does not teach wherein the cooling die is releasably provided at the exit of the extruder.
In the same field of endeavor, extrusion devices, Klein teaches an arrangement of a cooling tool on a food extruder (see Fig. 1; [0046]), comprises a cooling tool (1) is in particular a cooling die for a food or an animal feed extruder (E), the cooling tool has an inlet end (3) connected to the extruder (see abstract; Figs. 1-2;[0010]); wherein the cooling die is releasably provided at the exit of the extruder (see [0010] and [0035-0036]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to make the cooling die is releasably provided at the exit of the extruder as such is known in the art of additive manufacturing given the discussion of Klein above presenting a reasonable expectation of success; and doing so is applying a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results, with the added benefit of doing so allows for improving functionality and maintainability of an extrusion system (as recognized by Klein at [0010] and [0028] ).
Regarding claim 23, Sharman in view of Klein further teaches the device, wherein the distributor unit (15a) and heat exchange unit are releasably provided at the exit of the extruder (see [0010], [0028] and [0035-0036] of Klein).
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sharman (WO 2020/079440 - of record) as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of Howsam (US 6,635,301).
Regarding claim 20, Sharman teaches the device as discussed in claim 16 above.
Sharman does not teach a heat exchange unit is provided upstream of the inlet port for the insertion of cellular material.
In analogous art, extrusion devices, devices for manufacturing food product, Howsam teaches an apparatus for manufacturing a texturised proteinaceous meat analogue product, comprises an extruder (22), an inlet (24) for insertion of proteinaceous lava; ; a cooling die (34) arranged downstream of the exit of the extruder; and a heat exchange unit (36,37) is provided upstream of the inlet port for the insertion of proteinaceous material (see Figs. 1-3; column 7, lines 11-30 and lines 54-67).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the apparatus as taught by Sharman in view of Howsam with a heat exchange unit is provided upstream of the inlet port for the insertion of cellular material as such is known in the art of extrusion devices given the discussion of Howsam above; and doing so is combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, with the added benefits of doing so would cool and reduces the viscosity of the protein lava to obtain a cohesive, texturised, extrudate slab or ribbon in which vapour-flashing is substantially inhibited (see Abstract of Howsam).
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sharman (WO2020/079440 - of record).
Regarding claim 21, Sharman teaches the device as discussed in claim 16 above.
While Sharman further teaches a screw element (impeller 112) arranged in the product stream in the extruder adjacent to the exit of the extruder (102) or adjacent to the region where the inlet port (108) for the insertion of cellular material (see Figs. 1-3; Page 8, lines 10-15), Sharman does not explicitly teach a screw element is provided is designed so as to enable a pressure reduction downstream of said screw element. However, Sharman teaches the screw element (114) is adjacent to the outlet (106) and the injection port (114) and the screw profile is designed to control pressure (see page 7, lines 1-20). Sharman further acknowledges pressure gradients in the extruder, including high pressure near the outlet and screw’s role in pressure control and the need of a high-pressure pump at the injection port (see Page 9, lines 1-20).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the apparatus as taught by Sharman with screw element is provided is designed so as to enable a pressure reduction downstream of said screw element as such is known in the art of extrusion devices given the discussion of Sharman above; and doing so is combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, with the added benefits of doing so would facilitate injection and improve extrudate flow (see Abstract of Howsam).
Conclusion
Additional prior art made of record and not relied upon that is considered to be pertinent to Applicant's disclosure:
Dolan (US 4,732,734) discloses a relevant apparatus for meat-containing solid pet food (Abstract; Figs. 1-5).
Li (US 2022/00794194) discloses a relevant apparatus for extruded food products comprising cultivated animal cells and a plant protein (Abstract; Fig. 1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMED K AHMED ALI whose telephone number is (571)272-0347. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 AM-7:30 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, Galen Hauth can be reached at 571-270-5516. 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.
/MOHAMED K AHMED ALI/Examiner, Art Unit 1743
Prosecution Insights