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 6-7 and 20-25, directed to the gum/product composition, in the reply filed on August 15, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 11-14 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
An action on the merits of elected Claims 6-7 and 20-25 is provided below.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on January 21, 2025 was filed. 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 § 103
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 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 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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 6-7 and 20-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cai et al. US 2010/0104518 in view of Johnson et al. US 6,238,711, Rajaiah et al. US 2003/0072841, Choi et al. US 2003/0129145, Jani et al. US 2006/0280834, Luo et al. US 2002/0071858, Miskewitz US 5,693,334, Zibell et al. US 5,124,160, and Castle et al. US 2010/0233100 as further evidenced by Heath US 2017/0027168.
Regarding Claim 6, Cai et al. discloses a chewing gum composition (‘518, Paragraph [0084]) comprising a gum base (‘518, Paragraphs [0134]-[0135]), sodium bicarbonate (‘518, Paragraph [0108]), and ginger powder (‘518, Paragraphs [0300] and [0306]).
Cai et al. discloses the chewing gum composition comprising alginate coating (‘518, Paragraph [0087]) and vegetable gum alginates as a panning modifier for panning xylitol carbohydrates (‘518, Paragraph [0145]). However, Cai et al. is silent regarding the alginate being sodium alginate. Cai et al. is also silent regarding the sodium alginate being present in a concentration of about 0.10% by weight of the chewing gum composition.
Johnson et al. discloses a method of increasing the flavor release of chewing gum comprising a chewing gum base wherein the chewing gum composition comprises an alginate material of sodium alginate (‘711, Column 2, lines 1-15) wherein less flavor is needed to give the impression of the usual flavor level (‘711, Column 1, lines 42-57) wherein sodium alginate is present in the chewing gum product in an amount from about 0.01% to about 1% by weight (‘711, Column 1, lines 58-67), which encompasses the claimed sodium alginate concentration of about 0.10% by weight of the chewing gum composition.
Both Cai et al. and Johnson et al. are directed towards the same field of endeavor of chewing gum composition comprising a chewing gum base. Both chewing gum compositions of Cai et al. and Johnson et al. are sugarless and contain xylitol (‘518, Paragraphs [0084], [0129], and [0145]) (‘711, Column 2, lines 22-24) (‘711, Column 3, lines 4-10). Both chewing gum formulations of Cai et al. and Johnson et al. also contain an alginate. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the chewing gum composition of Cai et al. and incorporate sodium alginate into the chewing gum formulation as taught by Johnson et al. since the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination in view of Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945) (MPEP § 2144.07). Johnson et al. teaches that there was known utility in the food and beverage art to use sodium alginate as an ingredient in making chewing gum compositions. Additionally, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the chewing gum composition of Cai et al. and incorporate sodium alginate in the claimed concentration within the chewing gum composition as taught by Johnson et al. since where the claimed sodium alginate concentration in the chewing gum composition encompasses sodium alginate concentration in the chewing gum composition ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists in view of In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (MPEP § 2144.05.I.).
Further regarding Claim 6, Cai et al. modified with Johnson et al. is silent regarding the chewing gum composition comprising calcium pantothenate, celery powder, and aloe vera powder.
Rajaiah et al. discloses a chewing gum composition comprising a gum base (‘841, Paragraph [0053]), sodium bicarbonate (‘841, Paragraph [0071]), and calcium pantothenate (‘841, Paragraph [0038]).
Both modified Cai et al. and Rajaiah et al. are directed towards the same field of endeavor of chewing gum compositions. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the chewing gum composition of modified Cai et al. and incorporate calcium pantothenate as an ingredient into the chewing gum formulation as taught by Rajaiah et al. since the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination in view of Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945) (MPEP § 2144.07). Rajaiah et al. teaches that there was known utility in the food and beverage art to use calcium pantothenate as an ingredient in making chewing gum compositions.
Further regarding Claim 6, Cai et al. modified with Johnson et al. and Rajaiah et al. is silent regarding the chewing gum composition comprising celery powder and aloe vera powder.
Choi et al. discloses a chewing gum composition comprising a chewing gum base (‘145, Paragraph [0009]) and celery powder (‘145, Paragraphs [0013]-[0016]).
Both modified Cai et al. and Choi et al. are directed towards the same field of endeavor of chewing gum compositions. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the chewing gum composition of modified Cai et al. and incorporate celery powder as an ingredient into the chewing gum formulation as taught by Choi et al. since the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination in view of Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945) (MPEP § 2144.07). Choi et al. teaches that there was known utility in the food and beverage art to use celery powder as an ingredient in making chewing gum compositions and that celery has known utility as a material used in an extract for a nicotine eliminating material added to a chewing gum composition (‘145, Paragraphs [0014]-[0016]).
Further regarding Claim 6, Cai et al. modified with Johnson et al., Rajaiah et al., and Choi et al. is silent regarding the chewing gum composition comprising aloe vera powder.
Jani et al. discloses a chewing gum composition comprising a chewing gum base (‘834, Paragraph [0013]), sodium bicarbonate (‘834, Paragraph [0175]), and aloe vera (‘834, Paragraph [0212]).
Both modified Cai et al. and Jani et al. are directed towards the same field of endeavor of chewing gum compositions. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the chewing gum composition of modified Cai et al. and incorporate aloe vera as an ingredient into the chewing gum formulation as taught by Jani et al. since the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination in view of Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945) (MPEP § 2144.07). Jani et al. teaches that there was known utility in the food and beverage art to use aloe vera as an ingredient in making chewing gum compositions.
Further regarding Claim 6, Cai et al. modified with Johnson et al., Rajaiah et al., Choi et al., and Jani et al. is silent regarding sodium bicarbonate being present in an amount of about 2.0% by weight or calcium pantothenate, ginger root powder, celery root powder, or aloe vera powder being present in an amount of about 0.10% by weight.
Luo et al. discloses chewing gums containing from 0.1% to 15% by weight of sodium bicarbonate (‘858, Paragraph [0023]), which encompasses the claimed sodium bicarbonate concentration in the chewing gum composition of about 2.0% by weight. Luo et al. also discloses it is known to use sodium bicarbonate, aka baking soda or bicarbonate of soda or carbonic acid monosodium salt, in dental care for the purposes of reducing plaque and whitening teeth and reducing oral malodor wherein sodium bicarbonate is bactericidal against most periodontal pathogens in high concentrations and sodium bicarbonate has been used in chewing gums as a filler, a buffer, a dental plaque remover, and as an abrasive when used in higher amounts (‘858, Paragraph [0007]). Additionally, Miskewitz discloses a chewing gum composition comprising a chewing gum base and one or more active ingredients mixed into the base (‘334, Column 2, lines 37-49) made by mixing a preheated gum base with sorbitol, mannitol, maltitol, micronized sodium bicarbonate, and sodium percarbonate powders (‘334, Column 8, lines 34-57) wherein sodium bicarbonate is present in an amount of about 0.5-25 percent by weight of the chewing gum composition (‘334, Column 3, lines 37-52), which also encompasses the claimed sodium bicarbonate concentration in the chewing gum composition of about 2.0% by weight.
Modified Cai et al., Luo et al., and Miskewitz are all directed towards the same field of endeavor of chewing gum compositions. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the chewing gum composition of modified Cai et al. and incorporate sodium bicarbonate in the claimed concentration of the chewing gum composition as taught by Luo et al. and Miskewitz since where the claimed sodium bicarbonate concentration in the chewing gum composition encompasses sodium bicarbonate concentration in the chewing gum composition ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists in view of In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (MPEP § 2144.05.I.). Furthermore, differences in the concentration of sodium bicarbonate in the chewing gum composition will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration of sodium bicarbonate in the chewing gum composition is critical. Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation in view of In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955) (MPEP § 2144.05.II.A.). One of ordinary skill in the art would also adjust the concentration of sodium bicarbonate of the chewing gum composition of modified Cai et al. which sodium bicarbonate serves as a buffer in chewing gums as disclosed by Luo et al. (‘858, Paragraph [0007]) based upon the desired pH levels of the chewing gum.
Further regarding Claim 6, Cai et al. modified with Johnson et al., Rajaiah et al., Choi et al., Jani et al., Luo et al., and Miskewitz is silent regarding the concentration of calcium pantothenate, ginger powder, celery powder, and aloe vera each being in an amount of about 0.10% by weight of the chewing gum composition.
Zibell et al. discloses a chewing gum formulation comprising a chewing gum base (‘160, Column 4, lines 10-20) comprising a granulated active ingredient including but not limited to sweeteners, salts, food acids, and medicaments (‘160, Column 3, lines 10-19) in an amount of from about 0.1 to about 3% in the chewing gum formulation, which encompasses the claimed concentration of about 0.10% by weight of calcium pantothenate, ginger powder, celery powder, and aloe vera each. Zibell et al. also discloses the level of granulated active ingredient added depends upon the final concentration of the active ingredient in the granulation (‘160, Column 4, lines 1-9). Additionally, Castle et al. discloses a chewing gum composition comprising 0.01-20 wt% active ingredients (‘100, Paragraph [0096]), which also encompasses the claimed concentration of about 0.10% by weight of calcium pantothenate, ginger powder, celery powder, and aloe vera each. It is noted that applicant discloses the claimed ingredients of ginger and aloe vera are examples of types of active ingredients. Castle et al. discloses the active ingredients being a vitamin, mineral, or other nutritional supplement (‘100, Paragraph [0094]). Heath provides evidence that it was known in the food and beverage art that calcium pantothenate is also known as Vitamin B5 (‘168, Paragraph [0259]).
Both modified Cai et al. and Zibell et al. are directed towards the same field of endeavor of chewing gum formulations. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the concentration of any active ingredients in the chewing gum formulation such as calcium pantothenate, ginger powder, celery powder, and/or aloe vera powder to the claimed concentration of about 0.10% by weight as taught by Zibell et al. and Castle et al. since where the claimed concentration of active ingredients, e.g. sodium alginate, calcium pantothenate, ginger powder, celery powder, and aloe vera, in the chewing gum composition encompasses active ingredient concentrations in the chewing gum composition ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists in view of In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (MPEP § 2144.05.I.). Furthermore, differences in the concentration of active ingredients in the chewing gum composition will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration of active ingredients in the chewing gum composition is critical. Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation in view of In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955) (MPEP § 2144.05.II.A.). One of ordinary skill in the art would also adjust the concentration of any active ingredients present in the chewing gum composition of modified Cai et al. based upon the desired dosage of the desired active ingredient wish to be released when the consumer chews the chewing gum composition.
Regarding Claim 7, Cai et al. modified with Johnson et al., Rajaiah et al., Choi et al., Jani et al., Luo et al., Miskewitz, Zibell et al., and Castle et al. is silent regarding a weight ratio of sodium bicarbonate to each of sodium alginate, calcium pantothenate, ginger powder, celery powder, and aloe vera powder being about 20:1. However, Cai et al. discloses gum formulation modifications affect the release rate of medicaments wherein additional of alkaline materials such as sodium bicarbonate may make the saliva slightly alkaline, which increases buccal/lingual absorption of the medicament into the bloodstream (‘518, Paragraph [0108]). Rajaiah et al. discloses sodium bicarbonate being present in the chewing gum composition in a concentration of about 0.5% to about 50% (‘841, Paragraph [0071]). Zibell et al. discloses the level of granulated active ingredient added depends upon the final concentration of the active ingredient in the granulation (‘160, Column 4, lines 1-9). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the chewing gum composition of modified Cai et al. and adjust the weight ratio of sodium bicarbonate to each of the claimed active ingredients of sodium alginate, calcium pantothenate, ginger powder, celery powder, and aloe vera to the claimed weight ratio since differences in the concentration of sodium bicarbonate relative to the concentration of the active ingredients of sodium alginate, calcium pantothenate, ginger powder, celery powder, and aloe vera powder in the chewing gum composition will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such weight ratios of the concentrations of sodium bicarbonate relative to any particular active ingredient in the chewing gum composition is critical. Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation in view of In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955) (MPEP § 2144.05.II.A.). One of ordinary skill in the art would adjust the amount of sodium bicarbonate used in the chewing gum composition of modified Cai et al. to be significantly higher than the concentrations of any particular active ingredient based upon the desired degree of buccal/lingual absorption of the medicament into the bloodstream as suggested by Cai et al. (‘518, Paragraph [0108]).
Regarding Claim 20, Cai et al. discloses the chewing gum composition comprising xylitol (‘518, Paragraph [0048]).
Regarding Claim 21, Cai et al. discloses the chewing gum composition being in the form of a gum piece having a weight of about 1.5 grams per piece (‘518, Paragraph [0071]). Although Cai et al. modified with Johnson et al., Rajaiah et al., Choi et al., Jani et al., Luo et al., Miskewitz, Zibell et al., and Castle et al. is silent regarding the sodium bicarbonate, sodium alginate, calcium pantothenate, ginger powder, celery powder, and aloe vera powder collectively having a total weight of about 50 mg in the gum piece, it is noted that the claim does not specify the total weight of the gum piece itself. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the amount of the claimed ingredients of Cai et al. since differences in the amounts of ingredients in the chewing gum composition will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such amounts of ingredients in the chewing gum composition is critical. Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation in view of In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955) (MPEP § 2144.05.II.A.). One of ordinary skill in the art would adjust the amounts of any ingredients present in the chewing gum composition of modified Cai et al. based upon the desired dosage of the desired active ingredient wish to be released when the consumer chews the chewing gum composition and based upon the size of the chewing gum composition.
Regarding Claim 22, Castle et al. discloses the chewing gum composition being in the form of a gum piece having a total weight of 0.5-4.5 g (‘100, Paragraph [0096]), which converts to 500-4500 mg, which encompasses the claimed total weight of the gum piece of about 2000 mg. Luo et al. discloses the chewing gum containing from 0.1% to 15% by weight sodium bicarbonate (‘858, Paragraph [0023]). Using the unit size of a gum piece of 500-4500 mg disclosed by Castle et al., the chewing gum composition of Luo et al. would be (500-4500mg) x (0.001-.15) = 0.5-675 mg sodium bicarbonate, which encompasses the claimed gum piece comprising about 40 mg sodium bicarbonate. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the chewing gum composition of modified Cai et al. and make the chewing gum composition in the form of a gum piece having the claimed total weight of about 2000 mg as taught by Castle et al. and the gum piece comprising about 40 mg sodium bicarbonate as taught by Luo et al. since where the claimed chewing gum composition weight and the amount of sodium bicarbonate encompasses chewing gum composition weight and amount of sodium bicarbonate ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists in view of In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (MPEP § 2144.05.I.). Furthermore, claims to a chewing gum composition of appreciable size is held unpatentable over prior art chewing gum compositions because limitations relating to the size of the chewing gum composition is into sufficient to patentably distinguish over the prior art in view of In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955) (MPEP § 2144.04.IV.A.). Castle et al. teaches that it was known and conventional in the food art to make chewing gum compositions in the claimed weighted amounts.
Further regarding Claim 22, Cai et al. modified with Johnson et al., Rajaiah et al., Choi et al., Jani et al., Luo et al., Miskewitz, Zibell et al., and Castle et al. is silent regarding the gum piece comprising about 2 mg each of sodium alginate, calcium pantothenate, ginger powder, celery powder, and aloe vera powder. However, Zibell et al. discloses the level of granulated active ingredient added depends upon the final concentration of the active ingredient in the granulation (‘160, Column 4, lines 1-9). Both modified Cai et al. and Zibell et al. are directed towards the same field of endeavor of chewing gum formulations. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the amount of any active ingredients in the chewing gum formulation such as sodium alginate, calcium pantothenate, ginger powder, celery powder, and/or aloe vera powder to the claimed amounts since differences in the amounts of active ingredients in the chewing gum composition will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such amounts of active ingredients in the chewing gum composition is critical. Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation in view of In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955) (MPEP § 2144.05.II.A.). One of ordinary skill in the art would also adjust the amounts of any active ingredients present in the chewing gum composition of modified Cai et al. based upon the desired dosage of the desired active ingredient wish to be released when the consumer chews the chewing gum composition.
Regarding Claim 23, Cai et al. discloses the chewing gum composition comprising maltitol, sorbitol, and xylitol (‘518, Paragraph [0044]) and other polyols (‘518, Paragraph [0043]). Rajaiah et al. discloses the chewing gum composition comprising polyols of isomalt (‘841, Paragraphs [0064] and [0078]).
Regarding Claim 24, Cai et al. discloses the chewing gum composition being in the form of a compressed gum piece (‘518, Paragraphs [0059] and [0078]). Castle et al. also discloses the chewing gum composition being in the form of a compressed gum piece (‘100, Paragraph [0182]).
Regarding Claim 25, Cai et al. discloses the chewing gum composition being sugarless (‘518, Paragraphs [0153] and [0165]), which reads on the claimed chewing gum composition being free of sucrose.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Moazzez et al. “The effect of chewing sugar free gum on gastro-esophageal reflux” (published November 2005) discloses the use of chewing gum with other conservative measures could provide a comparatively safe and effective method of controlling acid reflux and symptoms and may be effective in esophageal symptoms or reflux (Moazzez et al., Page 1065) wherein chewing sugar free gum for half an hour after a meal can reduce acidic postprandial esophageal reflux (Moazzez et al., Page 1062).
Redaction “Chewing gum: a solution for preventing gastro-oesophageal reflux?” <https://helvident.ch/en/chewing-gum-to-prevent-gastroesophageal-reflux-disease-gerd/> (published September 13, 2021) discloses gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a condition defined as the reflux of stomach contents and stomach acid into the esophagus, pharynx or oral cavity which reflux leads to inflammation of the digestive tract resulting in burning, irritation, regurgitation, and an acid taste in which untreated gastro oesophageal reflux can lead to esophageal damage and tooth erosion over time (Redaction, Page 1) wherein chewing gum stimulates the production of saliva resulting in more swallowing which naturally combats stomach upsets and also make the pH of saliva alkaline to neutralize the acidity of acid reflux and protects tooth enamel wherein chewing sugar free chewing gum can reduce postprandial gastro-oesophageal reflux wherein chewing gum stimulates salivation and prevents gastric reflux (Redaction, Page 2) and bicarbonate chewing gum neutralizes acid that rises from the stomach (Redaction, Page 3).
PDXENT “Home Remedies for Acid Reflux” <https://pdxent.com/home-remedies-for-acid-reflux/> (published October 4, 2019) discloses gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is usually shortened to acid reflux or heartburn (PDXENT, Page 1) wherein heartburn occurs when stomach acid flows into the esophagus, usually following a meal wherein chewing gum containing the ingredient bicarbonate cuts down on the amount of acid in your esophagus (PDXENT, Page 2).
Bloor West Smiles “10 Foods That Fight Bad Breath and Keep Your Mouth Fresh” <https://bloorwestsmiles.com/blog/10-foods-that-fight-bad-breath-and-keep-your-mouth-fresh/> (published April 18, 2022) discloses celery contains fibers that make the mouth produce more saliva when you eat them which fiber helps against bad breath by ensuring quick passage through the intestine (Bloor West Smiles, Page 1).
Chewing Gum Facts “Chewing Gum Types” <https://web.archive.org/web/20201201092127/https://www.chewinggumfacts.com/chewing-gum-facts/chewing-gums-types/> (archived December 1, 2020) discloses chewing gums come in a variety of flavors, shapes, and sizes and there is no standard type of gum (Chewing Gum Facts, Page 1).
Millard “8 Ways to Treat Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease” <https://www.healthcentral.com/slideshow/gastroesophageal-reflux-treatments> (published February 13, 2023) gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a condition characterized by chronic acid reflux (Millard, Page 1) wherein ginger has anti-inflammatory properties that helps ease irritation throughout the digestive tract from the esophagus into the stomach wherein ginger chews increases saliva production which soothes the esophagus and gently eases acid back down the stomach (Millard, Page 6).
Barkalow et al. WO 2007/070061 discloses a chewing gum with a sugarless coating (‘061, Paragraph [0001]).
Durr et al. US 2016/0270422 discloses a coated chewing gum (‘422, Paragraph [0001]) wherein the chewing gum is a coated sugar free and glycerol free chewing gum comprising a core and a coating wherein the core comprises at least one chewing gum base, a sweetener system consisting of sorbitol particles and at least one high intensity sweetener and/or a sweetness enhancer (‘422, Paragraphs [0015]-[0022]) wherein the chewing gum is sugar free and free of sucrose, glucose, lactose, and/or fructose (‘422, Paragraph [0023]).
Yoshimura et al. US 2016/0303042 discloses a nutraceutical confectionary composition of chewing gum ranging in size from approximately 1334 mg to approximately 3400 mg wherein the weight of a chewing gum tablet varies depending on the amounts of sweeteners, flavoring, and gum base included or the weight of the chewing gum tablet varies depending on the amounts of active ingredients include wherein increased amounts of gum base allows increased amounts of flavoring agents and sweeteners to be included wherein the taste and flavor of the gum tablet lasts longer because such ingredients are released more slowly as chewing is required to release the flavoring agents and sweeteners and/or active ingredients (‘042, Paragraph [0058]).
Pedersen et al. US 2011/0250150 discloses a piece of chewing gum having a weight of between 100 mg and 8000 mg (“150, Paragraphs [0036]-[0037]) wherein the sweetener system comprises hydrogrenated starch hydrolysate of a mixture of several sugar alcohols including a mixture of sorbitol, maltitol (‘422, Paragraph [0044]) wherein the coating comprises isomalt (‘422, Paragraph [0080]).
Zyck et al. US 7,244,454 discloses sodium bicarbonate containing chewing gums are generally sugarless wherein the greater amount of sodium bicarbonate used in the formula the lower the stability of aspartame in the formula resulting in a chewing gum product wherein the aspartame degrades wherein sodium bicarbonate comprises approximately 0.1% to about 1% by weight of the chewing gum.
Rizo et al. US 2025/0152621 discloses a chewing gum table comprising a core and a coating wherein the core comprises a gum base and sodium bicarbonate as an antacid active ingredient (‘621, Paragraphs [0022]-[0025]).
Gao et al. US 2022/0312822 discloses a chewing gum comprising sodium bicarbonate pH adjuster in an amount of about 1 weight percent (‘822, Paragraph [0302]).
Perez et al. US 2016/0192674 discloses a chewing gum composition a chewing gum base (‘674, Paragraph [0041]) comprising food grade acids including sodium bicarbonate wherein the acidulants are present in a suitable amount depending upon the desired level of intensity wherein the acidulants are present in an amount of about 0.1 to about 3 weight percent of the chewing gum composition (‘674, Paragraph [0081]).
Turkyilmaz et al. US 2015/0196506 discloses a chewing gum base mixed with sorbitol and sodium bicarbonate (‘506, Paragraph [0042]).
Amoako-Poku et al. US 2014/0271985 discloses a chewing gum composition comprising sodium bicarbonate to provide aeration to the composition when heated (‘985, Paragraph [0073]).
Gebreselassie et al. US 2006/0078509 discloses a powdered gum base mixed with sorbitol and sodium bicarbonate (‘509, Paragraph [0086]).
Azar et al. US 2001/0012636 discloses artificially sweetened or sugar free chewing gum including xylitol, sorbitol, maltitol syrup as sweetening agents or includes other artificial non sugar sweeteners such as aspartame, saccharine, and cyclamate or the like substituting for glucose wherein sweeteners like xylitol or sorbitol or the like or other artificial sweeteners are not efficiently metabolized by plaque bacteria and do not efficiently contribute to plaque acidification and other varieties of chewing gum directed to fighting plaque and caries includes sodium bicarbonate, aka baking soda which may neutralize plaque acids and restores favorable oral pH (‘636, Paragraph [0004]).
Lombardy Jr. et al. US 6,235,318 discloses chewing gum comprising a sodium bicarbonate gum base encapsulated with a citric acid coating wherein the chewing gum comprises an effervescence system comprising sodium bicarbonate and citric acid from 10 to 50% by weight of the final product.
Soldani et al. US 2003/0039720 discloses a gluten free edible chewing gum (‘720, Paragraph [0002]) that is sugar free and contains a bulk sweetener of isomalt, maltitol, sorbitol, erythritol, and the like wherein high intensity sweeteners are not as sweet as sucrose and are employed to make sugar free chewing gum more palatable, e.g. an artificial sweetener (‘720, Paragraph [0011]).
Han et al. US 2001/0036468 discloses a soft chewable multivitamin tablet comprising active ingredients and gums wherein the vitamins includes calcium panththenate (‘468, Paragraph [0019]).
Srinivasa US 2023/0148623 discloses a coated chewing gum with a coating comprising at least one polyol of xylitol, maltitol, and isomalt, and a gum binder comprising sodium alginate (‘623, Paragraph [0036]) wherein the amount of active ingredient present in the chewing gum depends on the requirements and the actual ingredient used wherein some active ingredients having high functional activity at very low doses such as vitamins and minerals (micronutrients) whereas others such as dextrose (macronutrients) are beneficial to the body in much higher amounts (‘623, Paragraph [0029]).
Hasjim et al. US 2023/0083049 discloses a chewing gum comprising a porous starch as a bulking agent (‘049, Paragraph [0001]) wherein the gum base further comprises emulsifiers and softeners of sodium alginate (‘049, Paragraph [0039]).
Lenzi et al. US 2012/0040050 discloses a chewing gum containing a hydrocolloid, e.g. sodium alginate, has a softer texture because the hydrocolloid swells in the presence of saliva and as a result the density of chewing gum has a softer chew texture (‘050, Paragraph [0118]) wherein one or more hydrocolloids such as sodium alginate is used in amounts between 1% w/w to 8% w/w (‘049, Paragraph [0122]).
Steinberg et al. US 2005/0058744 discloses a chewing gum composition comprising an adhesive active ingredient of sodium alginate to ensure the chewing gum is both highly adsorptive and well organoleptic (‘744, Paragraph [0069]).
Reggio et al. US 4,065,578 discloses a xylitol chewing gum comprising a hydrocolloid comprising sodium alginate to facilitate mixing with the xylitol, gum base and other ingredients of the chewing gum and increases moisture content and imparts softness to the gum.
Kristaiansen et al. US 2008/0131379 discloses a chewing gum comprising from about 0.5 to 15% active cosmetic ingredients based on the total weight of the chewing gum (‘379, Paragraph [0135]).
Athanikar et al. US 6,322,828 discloses a pharmaceutical chewing gum comprising a pharmaceutical active ingredient topically effective toward the gastrointestinal tract added in an amount such that the tablet ultimately formed includes a therapeutically effective dose of the active ingredient.
Andersen US 2004/0028772 discloses a method of preparing a chewing gum with a customer acceptable taste of an active ingredient substantially during all chewing phases wherein the taste of the specific active ingredient or mixtures of ingredients is evaluated with respect to taste in different concentrations wherein a maximal desired or acceptable concentration is elected for the active ingredient or such concentration is achieved by other means such as from the literature or any other information or even being a guess (‘772, Paragraph [0022]) wherein the desired amount of the active ingredient is incorporated into a standard chewing gum formulation (‘772, Paragraph [0023]).
Leadbetter et al. US 2005/0220934 discloses a chewing gum containing tablet comprising active ingredients usually up to 0.5% by weight of the chewing gum containing tablet wherein the amount of active ingredient present in the tableted chewing gum sweet depends on requirements and the actual ingredient used wherein some active ingredients have high functional activity at very low doses such as vitamins and minerals (micronutrients) whereas others such as dextrose (macronutrients) are beneficial to the body in much higher amounts (‘934, Paragraph [0018]).
Lepelletier et al. US 2013/0115174 discloses the amount of active ingredient in a chewing gum ranges from about 1 to about 50 mg (‘174, Paragraph [0083]) and the chewing gum comprises from about 0.1 to about 10% of active ingredient in weight to the weight of the total chewing gum (‘174, Paragraph [0085]).
Boghani et al. US 2014/0050818 discloses a gum composition comprising one or more unencapsulated active ingredients wherein the active ingredients includes sweeteners, flavorings, high intensity sweeteners, food grade acids, oral care agents, antioxidants, nutraceuticals, and/or pharmaceutical actives wherein the unencapsulated active ingredients are present in an amount of about 0.1 to about 2.0 weight percent based upon the total weight of the chewing gum composition (‘818, Paragraph [0024]).
Boghani et al. US 2020/0054040 discloses a chewing gum component for use in a chewing gum composition (‘040, Paragraph [0015]) wherein a mixture of pieces having varying release profiles are included in a final gum product to customize the release profile of the entire gum piece when the gum is chewed wherein the mixture of pieces includes pieces varying in the one or more active ingredients encapsulated therein wherein the amount of encapsulated active ingredient included in a final gum produce is reduced (‘040, Paragraph [0094]).
Voigt et al. US 2023/0346824 discloses a gum base formulation comprising one or more softening agents, e.g. lecithin and glycerine (‘824, Paragraph [0208]) wherein the formulation comprises certain specific emulsifiers and/or solubilizers in order to disperse and release the active ingredient (‘824, Paragraph [0209]) wherein the chewing gum is sugar free (‘824, Paragraph [0218]).
Mo et al. US 2021/0030018 discloses gum bases containing softeners including glycerin and lecithin and emulsifiers (‘018, Paragraph [0039]) used in sugarless gum (‘018, Paragraph [0042]).
Arnold et al. US 2019/0224116 discloses a chewing gum composition having a total core weight of between 1.4 g and 2.5 g (‘116, Paragraph [0156]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERICSON M LACHICA whose telephone number is (571)270-0278. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8:30am-5pm, 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, 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.
/ERICSON M LACHICA/Examiner, Art Unit 1792
