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 .
Status of the Application
Receipt is acknowledged of the amendment and response filed 6/5/2026. Claims 1,4-15 and 18-28 are pending in the application.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I claims 1,4-9 and 18-24 in the reply filed on 6/5/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 10-15 and 25-28 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/7/2024 was filed before the first office action. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 1 and dependent claims 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.
Claim 1 recites an edible microcarrier comprising a microcarrier core and “at least one microcarrier coating for cell attachment at least partially directly or indirectly covering the surface” of the microcarrier core.
The limitation “indirectly covering the surface” renders the scope of the claim unclear. While a coating directly covering the surface provides an ascertainable structural relationship between the coating and the core, it is unclear what structural relationship is required for a coating to indirectly cover the surface.
Claim 1 further recites as component B a mechanical stability agent different from component A, “or if component A at the same time acts as a mechanical stability agent “, a specified amount of an agent different from A.
It is unclear when component A is considered to “act as a mechanical stability agent”, and therefore which alternative of component B applies to a particular composition. The claim does not recite an objective criterion for determining whether a particular polysaccharide falling within component A selections also acts as a mechanical stability agent. Consequently, one of ordinary skill in the art cannot determine with reasonable certainty from the claim whether a particular composition is subject to the first or second alternative of component B.
Furthermore, to the extent that “mechanical stability agent” is defined by the result or function achieved rather than by a measured characteristic, the metes and bounds of this limitation are not clear. One of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. A meaningful comparison with the art is not possible.
General Comments
Claim 1 encompasses a very large number of materially different compositions due to multiple alternatives for components A-E, including various polysaccharides, additives, cells and water content , as well as different core/coating configurations. This results in substantial compositional and functional variability.
WO2015/038988A1 and CN113684177A cited in the application, are considered pertinent as they relate to edible microcarriers for cultured meat applications with polysaccharide-based structures and cell-interactive surface features.
However, due to the breadth and ambiguity of the current claim scope, a full prior-art analysis is not possible until the clarity issues identified above are appropriately resolved.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Subbalakshmi Prakash whose telephone number is (571)270-3685. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, Emily Le can be reached at (571) 272-0903. 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.
/SUBBALAKSHMI PRAKASH/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1793
Prosecution Insights