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 .
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it is not within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In page 9, line 26, the compounds “HMFone” and “HDFone” should be named at least once and/or the first time they are recited with their acronym in parenthesis. For example, 4-hydroxy-5-methyl-3(2H)-furanone (HMFone), Hydroxy Dihydro Furanone (HDFone).
In page 13, line 23, “vigreux column” should read “Vigreux column”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, line 4, “10’000” should read “10000”.
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 1-21 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.
Claims 1 and 20 recite “fat-type flavor”. The claim is indefinite because it is unclear what would be considered a fat-type flavor since there are various different types of fats (i.e., vegetable fat/oils, olive, seed fats/oils, legume fats/oils, animal fat/oils, etc.) all having different flavors. While on page 4, lines 24-27 of the instant specification mentions that “Surprisingly, it was found that flavor enhancers comprising at least ten of the above marker components, in the indicated concentrations, were able to provide a very characteristic flavor profile of fatty, animalic (lamb) bone marrow, caramellic, sweetish tonalities providing a long- lasting culinary succulence on the tongue and in the mouth cavity.”, there is no definition for what specific “fat-type flavor” is.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "the flavoring preparation" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 21 recites “preparing the flavor enhancer of claim 1” but does not recites any steps related to the ingredients in claim 1. It is not clear if steps (i) and (ii) are referring to the marker components of claim 1 or referring to some different starting materials.
Claim 21 recites “the resulting material” without providing any specificity as to what is “the resulting material” referring to (i.e., the resulting material the reacted materials or something else).
Claims 2-17 and 19 are rejected by virtue of their dependance on a base rejected claim.
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) 1-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lohse et al. [US20190328012A1], hereinafter Lohse, in view of Kawasaki [JP2005015683A], Kawasaki [JP2005013138A], hereinafter Kawasaki’138, and Winning et al. [US20160198747A1], hereinafter Winning, evidenced by PubChem [Compound: 4-methyl-5-(2-hydroxyethyl)thiazole, 2004].
Regarding claim 1, Lohse teaches a flavor enhancer [Lohse, abstract, 0003, 0010] for providing a fat-type flavor (flavor composition for providing savory, poultry, toasted cheese, seared or animalic, chocolate, and butter flavor notes, equivalent to fat-type flavors) [Lohse, 0024, 0036, 0077], the flavor enhancer comprising the following marker components:
1) propionic acid (propanoic acid) [Lohse, 0072];
2) acetic acid [Lohse, 0079];
3) maltol [Lohse, 0070, 0079];
4) trimethylpyrazine [Lohse, 0079];
Lohse does not teach the flavor enhancer comprising the following marker components (to complete a total of at least ten marker components):
5) furaneol;
6) 2,5-dimethylpyrazine;
7) 2,3-octanedione;
8) 2-acetylthiazole;
9) heptanal; and
10) sulfurol; and
the specific indicated concentrations being claimed for each of the marker components 1-10.
Kawasaki teaches a flavor enhancer for providing a fat-type flavor (meat/beef flavor) [Kawasaki, abstract, 0006], the flavor enhancer comprising:
5) furaneol [Kawasaki, 0030];
6) 2,5-dimethylpyrazine [Kawasaki, 0018];
7) 2,3-octanedione [Kawasaki, 0084];
8) 2-acetylthiazole [Kawasaki, 0022];
9) heptanal [Kawasaki, 0082]; and
10) sulfurol (synonym to 4-methyl-5-thiazoleethanol [Kawasaki, 0022], see evidence of PubChem, p.9, sec.2.4.2 Synonyms).
Further, regarding the specific indicated concentrations being claimed for each of the marker components 1-10, Kawasaki teaches that the amount of the flavors (organic compounds A-O as flavoring components/substances) used may be:
- from 0-30% w/w (0-300000 ppm) for carboxylic acids (such as 1) propionic and 2) acetic acids [Kawasaki, 0085] acids already taught by Lohse [Lohse, 0072 and 0079]) [Kawasaki, 0014-0015];
- from 0-10% w/w (0-100000 ppm) for pyrazines (such as 4) trimethylpyrazine [Kawasaki, 0018] trimethylpyrazine already taught by Lohse [Lohse, 0079], and 2,5-dimethylpyrazine [Kawasaki, 0018]) [Kawasaki, 0014-0015];
- from 0-40% w/w (0-400000 ppm) for furanones (such as 5) furaneol [Kawasaki, 0030]) [Kawasaki, 0014-0015];
- from 0-10% w/w (0-100000 ppm) for thiazoles (such as 8) 2-acetylthiazole [Kawasaki, 0022]) [Kawasaki, 0014-0015]; and
- from 0-10% w/w (0-100000 ppm) for thiazoles (such as 10) sulfurol or 4-methyl-5-thiazoleethanol [Kawasaki, 0022]) [Kawasaki, 0014-0015], which are concentrations that encompass the claimed amounts for propionic acid, acetic acid, trimethylpyrazine, furaneol, 2,5-dimethylpyrazine, 2-acetylthiazole, and sulfurol.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the marker components of furaneol, 2,5-dimethylpyrazine, 2,3-octanedione, 2-acetylthiazole, heptanal, and sulfurol, and further use a wide range concentration amount that encompass the claimed ranges for propionic acid, acetic acid, trimethylpyrazine, furaneol, 2,5-dimethylpyrazine, 2-acetylthiazole, and sulfurol as taught by Kawasaki, based on the particular application or flavor in which the flavor components are being used, in the flavor enhancer of Lohse, since Lohse already express interest in compounds that contribute to red meat notes (beef/meaty aromas/flavors) [Lohse, 0036], and because Kawasaki teaches that these marker components contribute to savory or meaty aromas [Kawasaki, 0006], and provide a stronger and more preferable meat-based flavor composition, and food, in which flavor characteristics are imparted, improved, and enhanced by containing the meat-based flavor composition [Kawasaki, 0010].
Lohse in view of Kawasaki teaches the flavor enhancer comprising the at least ten marker components of propionic acid, acetic acid, maltol, trimethylpyrazine, furaneol, 2,5-dimethylpyrazine, 2,3-octanedione, 2-acetylthiazole, heptanal, and sulfurol, but are silent regarding the maltol, and heptanal being present in the flavor composition at the claimed indicated concentration.
Kawasaki’138 teaches a flavor enhancer made from individual components (A-M) [Kawasaki’138, abstract], including (D) aldehydes such as heptanal [Kawasaki’138, 0013], wherein said aldehyde(s) including heptanal may be present in the flavor composition in amounts of from 0-30% w/w (0-300000 ppm) [Kawasaki’138, 0010], and may additionally include (E) ketones [Kawasaki’138, 0014], such as maltol [Kawasaki’138, 0014], wherein said ketone(s) including maltol may be present in the flavor composition in amounts of from 0-30% w/w (0-300000 ppm) [Kawasaki’138, 0010], which are concentrations that encompass the claimed amounts for heptanal and maltol.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the marker components of heptanal and maltol at concentration ranges that encompass the claimed concentrations, based on the particular application or flavor in which the flavor components are being used as taught by Kawasaki’138, in the flavor enhancer of modified Lohse, since Lohse teaches that different additional compounds that are well known in the art may be employed in the flavor composition, and they may be combined or used in a manner known to a skilled flavorist, depending upon the particular reaction flavor that it is desired to create [Lohse, 0057]. That is, an ordinarily skilled flavorist will be able to mix a reaction flavour solid composition of the present invention with other known ingredients employed in flavour compositions to develop a wide variety of complete flavour compositions to satisfy the requirements of the food and beverage industry [Lohse, 0067]. Further, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include the marker component of maltol as taught by Kawasaki’138, in the flavor enhancer of modified Lohse, because Kawasaki’138 teaches that these individual organic components combined to make the flavor enhancer composition are suitable for providing a fat-type flavor to food products such as meat/beef products, fish products and cheese products [Kawasaki’138, 0076], which are all fat-type, fat-containing flavored foods.
Modified Lohse teaches the flavor enhancer for providing a fat-type flavor comprising the at least ten marker components of propionic acid, acetic acid, maltol, trimethylpyrazine, furaneol, 2,5-dimethylpyrazine, 2,3-octanedione, 2-acetylthiazole, heptanal, and sulfurol, but is silent regarding the 2,3-octanedione being present in the flavor composition at the claimed indicated concentration.
Winning teaches flavoring compositions (Formula I) made from individual components (volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and non-volatile organic compounds referred to as groups (B-1 to B-7)) [Winning, Title, Abstract, 0074], where the composition may comprise (B-3) aroma molecules found in meat or contributing to the aroma of meat (fatty flavor) [Winning, 0078], and wherein (B-3) includes C4-C15 ketones [Winning, 0079], such as 2,3-octanedione (a C8 ketone) [Winning, 0095, 0099, 0124], where the amount of the compounds (individual flavor substances) in the flavor composition (Formula I) may be added in an effective amount [Winning, 0001]. Wherein the effective amount is defined as an amount sufficient to impart, enhance and/or modify the perception of a flavor of one or more other flavoring agents, in particular other flavoring agents producing or imparting a meaty sensory effect [Winning, 0063]. Wherein a semifinished product may comprise a content of from 0.0001% by weight (1 ppm) to 40% by weight (400000 ppm) of an aroma composition, based on the total weight of the semifinished product [Winning, 0208], and a ready-to-eat or ready-to-use product may comprise a total amount of the compounds of the flavor composition (Formula I) in the range of from 1-2 ppm or 1-4 ppm [Winning, 0203], which are ranges that fall within and/or overlaps with the claimed range of 0.50-3.00 ppm for 2,3-octanedione. While Winning does not explicitly recites 2,3-octanedione being at the specific amount of 0.50-3.00 ppm in the flavor composition, one of ordinary kill in the art would recognize that a flavoring composition that is intended to enhance and/or impart the aroma of meat (fatty flavor) may have any of the individual compounds of group (B-3) including the ketone 2,3-octanedione in amounts that are sensorially effective of one or more of these additional substances (B) as taught by Winning [Winning, 0073], where these ingredients include 2,3-octanedione at amounts of from 0.0001% by weight to 40% by weight (1 ppm to 400000 ppm) of an aroma composition or 1-2 ppm or 1-4 ppm as further taught by Winning [Winning, 0203, 0208].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the marker component of 2,3-octanedione in amounts of from 1-2 ppm or 1-4 ppm as taught by Winner, in the flavor enhancer of modified Lohse, because Winner teaches that 2,3-octanedione is a suitable compound to produce flavor compositions that contribute to a meat flavor [Winning, 0078-0079, 0095, 0099, 0124], and the amount may be an amount sufficient to be an effective amount to impart, enhance and/or modify the perception of a flavor of one or more other flavoring agents, in particular other flavoring agents producing or imparting a meaty sensory effect [Winning, 0001, 0063]. Further, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include the marker component of 2,3-octanedione in amounts of from 1-2 ppm or 1-4 ppm as taught by Winner, because Lohse teaches that different additional compounds that are well known in the art may be employed in the flavor composition, and they may be combined or used in a manner known to a skilled flavorist, depending upon the particular reaction flavor that it is desired to create [Lohse, 0057], to develop a wide variety of complete flavour compositions to satisfy the requirements of the food and beverage industry [Lohse, 0067].
Regarding claim 2, see claim 1 rejection above over Lohse in view of Kawasaki teaching the flavor enhancer according to claim 1, comprising furaneol in a concentration of from 0-40% w/w (0-400000 ppm) for furanones (such as 5) furaneol [Kawasaki, 0030]) [Kawasaki, 0014-0015].
Regarding claim 4, see claim 1 rejection above over Lohse in view of Kawasaki, where Lohse teaches the flavor enhancer comprising propionic acid (propanoic acid) [Lohse, 0072], and Kawasaki teaches the flavor enhancer comprising from 0-30% w/w (0-300000 ppm) for carboxylic acids [Kawasaki, 0014-0015], (such as 1) propionic acid) [Kawasaki, 0085].
Regarding claim 5, see claim 1 rejection above over Lohse in view of Kawasaki, where Kawasaki teaches the flavor enhancer comprising 2-acetylthiazole [Kawasaki, 0022], in amounts of from
0-10% w/w (0-100000 ppm) [Kawasaki, 0014-0015].
Regarding claim 6, see claim 1 rejection above over Lohse in view of Kawasaki and Kawasaki’138, where Kawasaki teaches the flavor enhancer comprising heptanal [Kawasaki, 0082], and Kawasaki’138 teaches the flavor enhancer comprising heptanal [Kawasaki’138, 0013], in amounts of from 0-30% w/w (0-300000 ppm) [Kawasaki’138, 0010].
Regarding claim 7, see claim 1 rejection above over Lohse in view of Kawasaki, where Lohse teaches the flavor enhancer comprising acetic acid [Lohse, 0079], and Kawasaki teaches the flavor enhancer comprising from 0-30% w/w (0-300000 ppm) for carboxylic acids [Kawasaki, 0014-0015], (such as 2) acetic acid) [Kawasaki, 0085].
Regarding claim 8, see claim 1 rejection above over Lohse in view of Kawasaki, where Kawasaki teaches the flavor enhancer comprising sulfurol (synonym to 4-methyl-5-thiazoleethanol [Kawasaki, 0022], see evidence of PubChem, p.9, sec.2.4.2 Synonyms), in amounts of from 0-10% w/w (0-100000 ppm) [Kawasaki, 0014-0015].
Regarding claim 9, see claim 1 rejection above over Lohse in view of Kawasaki’138, where Lohse teaches the flavor enhancer comprising maltol [Lohse, 0070, 0079], and Kawasaki’138 teaches the flavor enhancer comprising maltol at amounts of from 0-30% w/w (0-300000 ppm) [Kawasaki’138, 0010].
Regarding claim 10, see claim 1 rejection above over Lohse in view of Kawasaki, where Lohse teaches the flavor enhancer comprising trimethylpyrazine [Lohse, 0079], and Kawasaki teaches the flavor enhancer comprising trimethylpyrazine [Kawasaki, 0018] in amounts of from 0-10% w/w (0-100000 ppm) [Kawasaki, 0014-0015].
Regarding claim 11, see claim 1 rejection above over Lohse in view of Kawasaki, where Kawasaki teaches the flavor enhancer comprising 2,5-dimethylpyrazine [Kawasaki, 0018], in amounts of from 0-10% w/w (0-100000 ppm) [Kawasaki, 0014-0015].
Regarding claim 12, modified Lohse teaches the flavor enhancer according to claim 1, but is silent regarding the flavor enhancer comprising 2-acetylpyrrole in a concentration selected from the group consisting of 2.00 ppm to 8.00 ppm, 2.50 ppm to 6.00 ppm, and 3.00 ppm to 5.00 ppm.
Kawasaki teaches a flavor enhancer for providing a fat-type flavor discussed above in claim 1 [Kawasaki, abstract, 0006], the flavor enhancer comprising pyrroles such as 2-acetylpyrrole [Kawasaki, 0016], in amounts of from 0-30% w/w (0-300000 ppm) [Kawasaki, 0014-0015].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use 2-acetylpyrrole at a wide range concentration amounts depending on the particular application or flavor in which the flavor components are being used as taught by Kawasaki, in the flavor enhancer of Lohse, since Lohse already express interest in compounds that contribute to red meat notes (beef/meaty aromas/flavors) [Lohse, 0036], and because Kawasaki teaches that these marker components contribute to savory or meaty aromas [Kawasaki, 0006], and provide a stronger and more preferable meat-based flavor composition, and food, in which flavor characteristics are imparted, improved, and enhanced by containing the meat-based flavor composition [Kawasaki, 0010].
Regarding claim 15, see claim 1 rejection above over Lohse in view of Kawasaki and Winning, where Kawasaki teaches the flavor enhancer comprising 2,3-octanedione [Kawasaki, 0084], and Winning teaches the flavor enhancer comprising 2,3-octanedione [Winning, 0095, 0099, 0124], in amounts that are effective and sufficient to impart, enhance and/or modify the perception of a flavor of one or more other flavoring agents, in particular other flavoring agents producing or imparting a meaty sensory effect [Winning, 0001, 0063]. The effective or sufficient amounts being in the range of from 0.0001% by weight (1 ppm) to 40% by weight (400000 ppm) of an aroma composition in a semifinished product [Winning, 0208], or a ready-to-eat or ready-to-use product with a total amount of the compounds of the flavor composition in the range of from 1-2 ppm [Winning, 0203], which is a range that overlaps with the claimed ranges of 0.60 ppm to 2.50 ppm, 0.70 ppm to 2.20 ppm, and 0.80 ppm to 2.00 ppm.
It is additionally noted that claims 2-16 are additionally rejected based on their dependence to claim 1 because these claims do not positively recite the presence of the listed marker components as part of the flavor enhancer and claim 1 allows for “at least ten” of the recited marker components. That is, the claims do not recite, “further comprising.” Therefore the claims are rejected based on their dependence to claim
Regarding claim 17, modified Lohse teaches the flavor enhancer according to claim 1, but is silent regarding the flavor enhancer comprising tetramethylpyrazine in a concentration selected from the group consisting of 0.10 ppm to 2.00 ppm, 0.20 ppm to 1.50 ppm, and 0.25 ppm to 1.00 ppm.
Kawasaki teaches a flavor enhancer for providing a fat-type flavor discussed above in claim 1 [Kawasaki, abstract, 0006], the flavor enhancer comprising pyrazines including tetramethylpyrazine [Kawasaki, 0018], in amounts of from 0-10% w/w (0-100000 ppm) [Kawasaki, 0014-0015].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use tetramethylpyrazine at concentration amounts that encompass the claimed concentration ranges, based on the particular flavor being prepared as taught by Kawasaki, in the flavor enhancer of Lohse, since Lohse already express interest in compounds that contribute to red meat notes (beef/meaty aromas/flavors) [Lohse, 0036], and because Kawasaki teaches that these marker components contribute to savory or meaty aromas [Kawasaki, 0006], and provide a stronger and more preferable meat-based flavor composition, and food, in which flavor characteristics are imparted, improved, and enhanced by containing the meat-based flavor composition [Kawasaki, 0010].
Regarding claim 18, modified Lohse teaches the flavor enhancer according to claim 1, wherein the flavoring preparation is a solid flavoring preparation [Lohse, abstract], selected from a granulate (granule) or powder [Lohse, 0049].
Regarding claim 19, modified Lohse teaches a food product comprising the flavor enhancer according to claim 1 [Lohse, Title, 0001, 0014, 0018, 0066, 0088, 0091, claim 13].
Regarding claim 20, modified Lohse teaches a method of imparting a fat-type flavor to a food product, said method comprising the step of adding to said food product the flavor enhancer according to claim 1 [Lohse, Title, 0001, 0015, claim 14].
Regarding claim 21, modified Lohse teaches a method of preparing the flavor enhancer according to claim 1, comprising the steps of:
(i) providing starting materials/ingredients [Lohse, 0024, 0058, 0084, Example 1, 0107-0108]; and
(ii) reacting the starting materials and at the same time drying the resulting material in a microwave oven to obtain the flavor enhancer [Lohse, abstract, 0017];
wherein the starting materials include at least (a) a protein source or fragments of proteins or other materials with an amino functionality and (b) a fat or oil [Lohse, 0054, Example 1, 0107-0108].
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lohse [US20190328012A1], in view of Kawasaki [JP2005015683A], Kawasaki [JP2005013138A], and Winning [US20160198747A1], evidenced by PubChem [Compound: 4-methyl-5-(2-hydroxyethyl)thiazole, 2004], as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Shimazaki et al. [US4013800A], hereinafter Shimazaki, evidenced by PubChem [Compound: 4-hydroxy-5-methyl-3(2H)-furanone, 2005].
Further regarding claim 3, modified Lohse teaches the flavor enhancer according to claim 1, but is silent regarding the flavor enhancer comprising nor-furaneol in a concentration selected from the group consisting of 70 ppm to 170 ppm, 90 ppm to 150 ppm, and 100 ppm to 130 ppm.
Shimazaki teaches improvements in the flavor and aroma of ingestible compositions such as food [Shimazaki, col.1, l.10-11], relating to organic compounds such as 4-Hydroxy-5-methyl-2,3-Dihydrofuran-3-one (hereinafter nor-furaneol, see evidence of PubChem, p.8, 2.4.2 Synonyms). The invention is directed to the improvement of food flavors by using flavor substances or flavoring agents obtained from Maillard reactions such as nor-furaneol (4-Hydroxy-5-methyl-2,3-Dihydrofuran-3-one) [Shimazaki, col.1, l.10-14; l.24-27; l.62-65], and is suitable for fat-type flavored foods such as meats [Shimazaki, col.1, l.66-68], milk, eggs and fish amongst others [Shimazaki, col.2, l.1-2]. Suitable concentrations of the nor-furaneol compound in the flavor composition added to meat foods are in the range of from 10-500 ppm [Shimazaki, col.6, l.20-36], which is a range that overlaps with the claimed nor-furaneol concentrations of instant claim 3.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the marker component of nor-furaneol at concentration amounts in the range of from 10-500 ppm as taught by Shimazaki, in the flavor enhancer of Lohse, since Lohse already express interest in compounds that contribute to red meat notes (beef/meaty aromas/flavors) [Lohse, 0036], and because Shimazaki teaches that this would provide meat flavor to analog or simulated meat products [Shimazaki, col.6, l.20-36].
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lohse [US20190328012A1], in view of Kawasaki [JP2005015683A], Kawasaki [JP2005013138A], and Winning [US20160198747A1], evidenced by PubChem [Compound: 4-methyl-5-(2-hydroxyethyl)thiazole, 2004], as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Takagi et al. [WO2022004711A1], hereinafter Takagi, evidenced by Devitt [Cooking meat with alcohol adds flavor, consumer appeal, 2019].
Further regarding claim 13, modified Lohse teaches the flavor enhancer according to claim 1, but is silent regarding the flavor enhancer comprising proline-isoleucine diketopiperazine in a concentration selected from the group consisting of 15.0 ppm to 60.0 ppm, 17.5 ppm to 55.0 ppm, and 20.0 ppm to 50.0 ppm.
Takagi teaches beer flavored beverages containing at least one diketopiperazine including cycloisoleucylproline (cyclo (Ile-Pro) or cycloisoleucine proline or proline-isoleucine diketopiperazine) for enhancing and providing flavor in amount of 0.8 ppm or more [Takagi, abstract, 00013-0014, 0020].
Further, Devitt evidences that beer flavors are commonly used in combination with meat flavored or fat-type flavored foods such as beer braised proteins (i.e., beef), seafoods, cheeses and others, to further enhance flavor of foods [Devitt, p.2, par.1; p.3, par.3; p.4, par.2].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the component of proline-isoleucine diketopiperazine at concentration amounts in the range of from 0.8 ppm or higher as taught by Takagi, which would encompass the range concentrations of instant claim 13, in the flavor enhancer of Lohse, because Takagi teaches that this would provide flavor enhancing properties (i.e., fullness) to the foods to which the proline-isoleucine diketopiperazine is added, where some of the foods may be fat-type flavored foods (i.e., beef) as evidenced by Devitt [Devitt, p.2, par.1; p.3, par.3; p.4, par.2], and an ordinarily skilled artisan would recognize the amount to be added may be 0.8 ppm or more, which selected based on the nature of the product into which it is incorporated and/or the desired degree of fullness in the final product [Takagi, 0068-0069].
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lohse [US20190328012A1], in view of Kawasaki [JP2005015683A], Kawasaki [JP2005013138A], and Winning [US20160198747A1], evidenced by PubChem [Compound: 4-methyl-5-(2-hydroxyethyl)thiazole, 2004], as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Pickenhagen et al. [GB1420909A], hereinafter Pickenhagen, evidenced by PubChem [Compound: cyclo(L-Pro-L-Val), 2006].
Further regarding claim 14, modified Lohse teaches the flavor enhancer according to claim 1, but is silent regarding the flavor enhancer comprising proline-valine diketopiperazine in a concentration selected from the group consisting of 3.00 ppm to 9.00 ppm, 4.00 ppm to 8.00 ppm, and 5.00 ppm to 7.50 ppm.
Pickenhagen teaches flavoring compositions comprising at least one amino acid and/or at least one oligopeptide including cyclic dipeptides, also known as diketopiperazines and designated by the prefix “cyclo” placed before the abbreviated name of the dipeptide compound [Pickenhagen, p.2, l.3-4; p.2, l.37-41], where the diketopiperazines include cyclo-val-pro (equivalent to cyclo-pro-val, hereinafter proline-valine diketopiperazine, see evidence of PubChem, p.7, 2.4.1 Synonyms). The amount of the flavoring composition comprising at least the one proline-valine diketopiperazine incorporated into the flavored material can vary and include concentrations of from 5-10 ppm [Pickenhagen, p.2, l.19-21].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the component of proline-valine diketopiperazine at concentration amounts in the range of from 5-10 ppm as taught by Pickenhagen, in the flavor enhancer of Lohse, because Pickenhagen teaches that this would provide flavor enhancer compositions that are suitable for foods where some of the foods are fat-type flavored foods (i.e., cocoa-containing foods), and the amount to be added may be selected based on the nature of the product into which it is incorporated [Pickenhagen, p.2, l.9-16].
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lohse [US20190328012A1], in view of Kawasaki [JP2005015683A], Kawasaki [JP2005013138A], and Winning [US20160198747A1], evidenced by PubChem [Compound: 4-methyl-5-(2-hydroxyethyl)thiazole, 2004], as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Shahidt [Flavor of meat, meat products and seafoods, 1998], and Marchand et al. [The cysteine reaction with Diacetyl under wine-like conditions, 2011], hereinafter Marchand.
Further regarding claim 16, modified Lohse teaches the flavor enhancer according to claim 1, and Lohse in view of Kawasaki further teaches that the flavor enhancer may comprise any thiazoline with no limitation [Kawasaki, 0023], in amounts of from 0-20% w/w (0-100000 ppm) [Kawasaki, 0014-0015]. However, modified Lohse does not teach the specific thiazoline of 2-methyl-3-thiazoline.
Shahidt teaches meat, meat products and seafood flavors [Shahidt, Title] and compounds that are responsible for the flavors of these fat-type food products which includes amongst various compounds the specific thiazoline of 2-methyl-3-thiazoline [Shahidt, Table 4.5, p.78]; and
Marchand teaches that Maillard reaction is responsible for the characteristic flavors of food products [Marchand, left column, Introduction, par.1], and that the reaction of diacetyl (DI) with cysteine produce compounds that influence the aroma and flavor of foods such as 2-methyl-3-thiazoline [Marchand, abstract, right column, Introduction, par.2].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the specific thiazoline compound of 2-methyl-3-thiazoline as taught by Shahidt and Marchand, in the flavor enhancer of modified Lohse in view of Kawasaki, because Lohse in view of Kawasaki already teaches that the flavor enhancer may comprise any thiazoline with no limitation [Kawasaki, 0023], in amounts of from 0-20% w/w (0-100000 ppm) [Kawasaki, 0014-0015], which is a range that encompass the claimed ranges. Further, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include 2-methyl-3-thiazoline into the flavor enhancer of modified Lohse, because Shahidt teaches that 2-methyl-3-thiazoline is one of the compounds present and responsible for the flavors of fat-type food products such as meat, meat products and seafoods, and Marchand teaches that 2-methyl-3-thiazoline influence the aroma and flavor of foods and can be produced by reacting diacetyl (DI) with cysteine [Marchand, left column, Introduction, par.1; abstract, right column, Introduction, par.2]
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUIS EUGENIO DIOU BERDECIA whose telephone number is (571)270-0963. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-4:30.
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, Erik Kashnikow can be reached at (571) 270-3475. 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.
/LUIS EUGENIO DIOU BERDECIA/Examiner, Art Unit 1792
/VIREN A THAKUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1792
Prosecution Insights