DETAILED ACTION
Background
Claims 1-7 as filed with the instant application on May 31, 2024 have been examined. No amendments have been filed. Claims 8-17 have been withdrawn from consideration.
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 the invention of Group I, claims 1-7 drawn to a flavor-improving enzyme agent in the reply filed on May 13, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 8-17 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Objections
Claims 2 and 6 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 2, at line 2 after “lipase derived from” italicize --Penicillium--, and at line 3, after “derived from” italicize --Aspergillus-- and at the end of the line after “derived from” italicize --Mucor--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 2-3 and 6-7 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.
In each of claims 2 and 6, at line 2 the recited “lipase of at least one type” is indefinite. The addition of the word "type" to an otherwise definite expression (e.g., Friedel-Crafts catalyst) extends the scope of the expression so as to render it indefinite. Ex parte Copenhaver, 109 USPQ 118 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1955). See MPEP 2173.05(b)III.E. Are all forms of lipase from the recited microbial species included in the scope of the claims or not?
Claims 3 and 7 are rejected as depending from a rejected base claim.
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.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN 104187565 A to Li et al. (Li).
All references to Li refer to the Clarivate machine translation, a copy of which is provided with this Office action.
Regarding instant claims 1-4 and 6-7, at the Abstract on page 2 Li discloses a flavor ester composition (“flavor-improving enzyme agent for vegetable oils and fats” as in claim 1) comprising Aspergillus oryzae lipase (claim 2). Further, Li discloses a composition (at ADVANTAGE on page 2) that improves fruity flavor (“flavor improver for food products” - claim 4) and is obtained by allowing the lipase from Aspergillus (claim 6) to act on vegetable oils and fats. Further, Li discloses the vegetable oil and fat composition comprising coconut oil (claims 3 and 7).
Regarding instant claim 5, li at Abstract on page 2 discloses a method of preparing its flavor ester composition comprising adding 180-220 U/g Aspergillus oryzae lipase to the vegetable oils and fats comprising coconut oil and palm kernel with anhydrous butter and performing enzymolysis for 5-7 hours at 53-60°C. The temperature and time for treating the vegetable oils and fats of Li corresponds with the conditions disclosed in the Examples in the instant specification at the paragraph bridging pages 12 and 13. Accordingly, the Office considers the flavor improver for food products disclosed in the Abstract of Li to be substantially the same thing as the claimed flavor improver for food products. Absent a clear showing as to how the flavor improver for food products of Li differs from that as claimed, the Office considers the flavor improver for food products of Li at the Abstract on page 2 to comprise claimed amount of free fatty acid of from 0.6 to 500 mg per mL of the vegetable oils and fats. See MPEP 2112.01.I
Claims 1, 3-5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by EP1973415 B1 to Long (Long).
Regarding instant claims 1, 3-5 and 7, at [0012] Long discloses a flavor ester composition (“flavor-improving enzyme agent for vegetable oils and fats” as in claim 1) comprising lipase. Further, Long discloses at [0013] a modified coconut oil composition (“flavor improver for food products” - claim 4) obtained by allowing the lipase from to act on coconut oil (claims 3 and 7).
Regarding instant claim 5, at [0020] and pages 6-7 Long discloses its flavor improver for food products as Modified 1 comprising 10.56 wt% of free fatty acids or 105.6 mg free fatty acids per mL of vegetable oils and fats; Modified 2 comprising 14.13 wt% of free fatty acids or 141.3 mg free fatty acids per mL of vegetable oils and fats; Modified 3 comprising 24.30 wt% of free fatty acids or 243.0 mg free fatty acids per mL of vegetable oils and fats; Modified 4 comprising 13.44 wt% of free fatty acids or 134.4mg free fatty acids per mL of vegetable oils and fats; Modified 5 comprising 9.40 wt% of free fatty acids or 94.0 mg free fatty acids per mL of vegetable oils and fats; and Modified 6 comprising 25.01 wt% of free fatty acids or 250.1 mg free fatty acids per mL of vegetable oils and fats.
Regarding instant claims 2 and 6, Long at [0012] discloses the source of its lipase as lipase derived from Rhizomucor Miehei, which is a Mucor species.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW E MERRIAM whose telephone number is (571)272-0082. The examiner can normally be reached M-H 8:00A-5:30P and alternate Fridays 8:30A-5P.
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 H 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.
/ANDREW E MERRIAM/Examiner, Art Unit 1791
Prosecution Insights