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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on August 2, 2024, August 30, 2024, and September 5, 2025 were filed. The submissions are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “wherein the alkaline agent further contains magnesium hydroxide” in lines 1-2. Claim 1, lines 1-2 already requires the alkaline agent containing magnesium oxide. Claim 2 fails to further limit the limitations of Claim
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 1, 3-5, and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Savarese et al. US 2014/0377446.
Regarding Claim 1, Savarese et al. discloses a method of producing a dry fruit powder (‘446, Paragraph [0002]) wherein the fruit powder is acerola powder (‘446, Table 2) (‘446, Paragraph [0039]). The method comprises a mixing step of mixing fruit juice (‘446, Paragraph [0063]). Savarese et al. discloses that other commercially available powders often contain drying agents of magnesium oxide (‘446, Paragraph [0048]). Although Savarese et al. does not disclose the drying agents of magnesium oxide being applied to its invention, Savarese et al. teaches that it was known to incorporate drying agents of magnesium oxide into other commercially available powders. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the mixing step of Savarese et al. that mixes fruit juice with other ingredients and incorporate drying agents of magnesium oxide as was commercially known before the invention of Savarese et al. in order to facilitate drying of the powder. Furthermore, 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). Savarese et al. teaches that other commercially available powders were known to incorporate magnesium oxide as a drying agent.
Regarding Claim 3, Savarese et al. discloses it was known in the art that commercially available powders often contain more than 10% w/w of drying agents of magnesium oxide to facilitate drying of the plant derived product (‘446, Paragraph [0048]), which overlaps the content of the alkaline agent is from 5 to 15% by mass in the mixing step when the total amount of the solid content in the acerola juice and the alkaline agent is taken as 100% by mass. Where the claimed alkaline agent concentration of magnesium oxide overlaps alkaline agent concentration of magnesium oxide 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 alkaline agents of magnesium oxide will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration of alkaline agents of magnesium oxide 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 concentration of alkaline agent of magnesium oxide used in the powder of Savarese et al. based upon the desired degree of drying and to assists in the drying of the powder (‘446, Paragraph [0048]).
Regarding Claims 4-5, Savarese et al. is silent regarding the content of the alkaline agent is from 6 to 7% by mass or 7% by mass when the total amount of the solid content in the acerola juice and the alkaline agent is taken as 100% by mass. However, differences in the concentration of alkaline agents of magnesium oxide will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration of alkaline agents of magnesium oxide 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 concentration of alkaline agent of magnesium oxide used in the powder of Savarese et al. based upon the desired degree of drying and to assists in the drying of the powder (‘446, Paragraph [0048]).
Regarding Claims 11-12, Savarese et al. discloses the method of Claim 1 as enumerated in the rejections of Claim 1 above. Savarese et al. also discloses the method being used to produce an acerola dry powder (‘446, Table 2, Paragraphs [0037] and [0039]) that is a food composition (‘446, Paragraph [0176]).
Claims 2 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Savarese et al. US 2014/0377446 as applied to claim 1 above in further view of Renault et al. US 2015/0359254 (cited on Information Disclosure Statement filed August 2, 2024), Neaud et al. US 2015/0327587 (cited on Information Disclosure Statement filed August 2, 2024), and Zhong et al. US 2017/0128500.
Regarding Claims 2 and 9, Savarese et al. is silent regarding the alkaline agent further containing magnesium hydroxide or the alkaline agent consisting of magnesium oxide and magnesium hydroxide.
Renault et al. discloses an acerola juice concentrate powder containing magnesium hydroxide that stabilizes betanin pigments (‘254, Paragraph [0007]) made by mixing acerola fruit juice, magnesium hydroxide, and water (‘254, Paragraph [0016]) and drying to a water content of less than 8% by weight (‘254, Paragraph [0018]) wherein the powder is a soluble power allowing better release of the vitamin C and other active components of acerola fruit and thus better application efficacy wherein a powder having lower solubility has consequences for the application potential of the powder which cannot be incorporated into certain products homogeneously or without modifying the texture thereof (‘254, Paragraph [0026]). Neaud et al. discloses acerola fruit juice concentrate powder containing magnesium hydroxide that can replace erythorbate in cooked meat products (‘587, Paragraph [0006]) wherein the powder is a soluble powder allowing better release of the vitamin C and other active components of acerola fruit and thus better application efficacy wherein a powder having lower solubility cannot be incorporated into certain products homogeneously or without modifying the texture thereof (‘587, Paragraph [0025]). Zhong et al. discloses a fruit based nutritional composition (‘500, Paragraphs [0070] and [0132]) containing magnesium oxide and magnesium hydroxide (‘500, Paragraph [0125]).
Savarese et al., Renault et al., Neaud et al., and Zhong et al. are all directed towards the same field of endeavor of fruit powders. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the process of Savarese et al. and incorporating magnesium hydroxide into the alkaline agent in addition of the magnesium oxide alkaline agent as taught by Zhong et al. since Renault et al. and Neaud et al., and Zhong et al. all teach that there was known utility in the food and beverage art to incorporate magnesium hydroxide into a fruit powder and since Renault et al. and Neaud et al. both teach that these magnesium hydroxide containing powders allow better release of vitamin C of the acerola fruit. Furthermore, 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). Zhong et al. teaches that there was known utility in the food and beverage art to incorporate magnesium oxide and magnesium hydroxide in a fruit powder and Renault et al. and Neaud et al. both teach that there was known utility in the food and beverage art to incorporate magnesium hydroxide into acerola juice fruit powder.
Claims 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Savarese et al. US 2014/0377446 as applied claim 1 in view of Zhong et al. 2017/0128500 and Madhu “Difference Between Magnesium Oxide and Magnesium Hydroxide” <https://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-magnesium-oxide-and-magnesium-hydroxide/> (published July 9, 2019) (herein referred to as “Madhu”) as further evidenced by Satoh et al. US 2013/0098250 in further view of Weenink et al. US 2019/0142055.
Regarding Claims 6-8, Savarese et al. discloses the powder comprising an alkaline agent containing magnesium oxide (‘446, Paragraph [0048} and the powder having a flowability agent (‘446, Paragraph [0200]). However, Savarese et al. is silent regarding the content of magnesium oxide in the alkaline agent being from 14 to 86% by mass, 20 to 80% by mass, or 29 to 71% by mass.
Zhong et al. discloses a fruit based nutritional composition (‘500, Paragraphs [0070] and [0132]) containing magnesium oxide and magnesium hydroxide (‘500, Paragraph [0125]). Madhu discloses the key difference between magnesium oxide and magnesium hydroxide is that magnesium oxide has an oxide anion per one magnesium cation whereas magnesium hydroxide has two hydroxide anions per one magnesium cation (Madhu, Page 1) wherein magnesium oxide is hygroscopic and magnesium hydroxide is not hygroscopic, i.e. magnesium oxide is highly water soluble whereas magnesium hydroxide is poorly water soluble (Madhu, Page 4). Satoh et al. provides evidence that it was known in the art that magnesium oxide and magnesium hydroxide are both types of alkaline agents useful as food additives (‘250, Paragraph [0016]). Weenink et al. discloses a method of making granules displaying a high water solubility and good flowability without the need of using free flowing agents (‘055, Paragraph [0034]) wherein the granules are used for dried plant extract powders (‘055, Paragraph [0043]) wherein the increased solubility and flowability releases a better flavor, aroma, color, and taste while at the same time providing optimal nutrient retention and long shelf life (‘055, Paragraph [0134]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the method of making the powder of Savarese et al. and incorporate other alkaline agents in the form of magnesium hydroxide into the powder as taught by Zhong 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). Zhong et al. teaches that there was known utility in the food and beverage art to incorporate magnesium oxide and magnesium hydroxide in a fruit powder. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the process of Savarese et al. and adjust the concentration of magnesium oxide within the alkaline agent as suggested by Madhu based upon the desired solubility and flowability of the powder. Although Madhu does not explicitly disclose the content of magnesium oxide in the alkaline agent to be in the claimed concentrations, Madhu discloses magnesium oxide to be hygroscopic, i.e. highly water soluble (Madhu, Page 4). Satoh et al. provides evidence that it was known in the art that magnesium oxide and magnesium hydroxide are both types of alkaline agents useful as food additives (‘250, Paragraph [0016]). Weenink et al. discloses a method of making granules displaying a high water solubility and good flowability without the need of using free flowing agents (‘055, Paragraph [0034]) wherein the granules are used for dried plant extract powders (‘055, Paragraph [0043]) wherein the increased solubility and flowability releases a better flavor, aroma, color, and taste while at the same time providing optimal nutrient retention and long shelf life (‘055, Paragraph [0134]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the process of Savarese et al. and adjust the concentration of the magnesium oxide content in the alkaline agent since differences in the claimed concentration range of magnesium oxide content in the alkaline agent will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration range of magnesium oxide content in the alkaline agent 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 at the time of the invention would adjust the content of magnesium oxide in the alkaline agent of Savarese et al. which magnesium oxide is highly water soluble as taught by Madhu (Madhu, Page 4) based upon the desired solubility and flowability that releases a better flavor, aroma, color, and taste while at the same time providing optimal nutrient retention and long shelf life as taught by Weenink et al. (‘055, Paragraph [0134]).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Savarese et al. US 2014/0377446 in view of Renault et al. US 2015/0359254 (cited on Information Disclosure Statement filed August 2, 2024), Neaud et al. US 2015/0327587 (cited on Information Disclosure Statement filed August 2, 2024), and Zhong et al. US 2017/0128500 as applied to claim 9 above in further view of Madhu “Difference Between Magnesium Oxide and Magnesium Hydroxide” <https://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-magnesium-oxide-and-magnesium-hydroxide/> (published July 9, 2019) (herein referred to as “Madhu”).
Regarding Claim 10, Savarese et al. in view of Renault et al., Neaud et al., and Zhong et al. is silent regarding the mass ratio of magnesium oxide:magnesium hydroxide in the alkaline agent being 5:9.
Madhu discloses the key difference between magnesium oxide and magnesium hydroxide is that magnesium oxide has an oxide anion per one magnesium cation and is hygroscopic whereas magnesium hydroxide has two hydroxide anions per one magnesium cation and is not hygroscopic, i.e. magnesium oxide is highly water soluble but magnesium hydroxide is poorly water soluble.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the process of modified Savarese et al. and adjust the concentration of magnesium oxide to magnesium hydroxide in the alkaline agent since differences in the ratio of the concentration of alkaline agents of magnesium oxide to magnesium hydroxide will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such ratio of concentration of alkaline agents of magnesium oxide to magnesium hydroxide 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 ratio of the concentration of alkaline agent of magnesium oxide to magnesium hydroxide used in the powder of Saverese et al. based upon the desired solubility/free flowing degree of the powder as suggested by Madhu.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kawaguchi et al. US 2008/0267894 discloses an acerola powder (‘894, Paragraph [0098]) comprising pectin (‘894, Paragraph [0115]) having cross linked structure via binding with a polyvalent cation such as calcium or magnesium (‘894, Paragraph [0076]).
Toldeo et al. US 2019/0254327 discloses a fruit juice concentrate or powder comprising a dissolved oxygen sequestrant of acerola powder (‘327, Paragraph [0007]).
Tanada et al. US 2007/0128328 discloses acerola fruit juiced used for the bacterial growth inhibitor or bacteriostatic agent (‘328, Paragraph [0041]).
Eisner US 2018/0160708 discloses a dried produce made from banana and 14% acerola juice (‘708, Paragraph [0128]).
Chai et al. US 2014/0199464 discloses an acerola cherry powder and a method for producing the same (‘464, Paragraph [0001])
Menon US 6,027,757 discloses a method of producing dehydrated plant matter or portions thereof wherein the fruit is acerola cherries.
Morse US 3,086,915 discloses a method for producing a non-deliquescent vitamin C or ascorbic acid concentrate from acerola cherries (‘915, Column 1, lines 9-11).
Liu et al. US 2013/0236542 discloses a magnesium supplement (‘542, Paragraph [0006]) in the form of an oral dosage tablet form comprising magnesium and threonate (‘542, Paragraphs [0007]-[0008]) wherein the magnesium is complexed with an anion of hydroxide or oxide (‘542, Paragraphs [0009] and [0120]) wherein the magnesium threonate comprises acerola nutritional herbal ingredients (‘542, Paragraph [0123]).
Kloek et al. US 2017/0156375 discloses Mg(OH)2 is an alkaline agent (‘375, Paragraph [0029]).
Haase US 6,066,349 discloses a chemical product having magnesium oxide, magnesium hydroxide, or both and being applied as a preservative for animal or animal part containing fats, proteins, or both wherein the preservative appears in granular powder form (‘349, Column 3, lines 45-57).
Doultani US 2021/0068439 discloses a powdered fruit nutritional composition (‘439, Paragraph [0014]) comprising magnesium oxide and magnesium hydroxide (‘439, Paragraph [0053]).
Liu et al. US 2021/0015773 discloses a composition formulated from a dry mix comprising magnesium ion compounds and adding fruit juice (‘773, Paragraph [0143]) wherein dietary supplements have included magnesium oxide and magnesium hydroxide (‘773, Paragraph [0009]).
Muni et al. US 2017/0079910 discloses magnesium oxide is a buffering agent that maintains pH (‘910, Paragraph [0047]).
Lopez et al. US 2016/0271260 discloses a fruit powder (‘260, Paragraph [0061]) comprising magnesium oxide or magnesium hydroxide (‘260, Paragraph [0132]).
Rich et al. US 2016/0143845 discloses a rapidly dissolving orally administrable powder comprising fibers derived from fruits and vegetables (‘845, Paragraph [0031]) and magnesium oxide and magnesium hydroxide (‘845, Paragraph [0022]).
Roberts et al. US 2014/0255371 discloses a formulation comprising alkalinity increasing agents of magnesium oxide and magnesium hydroxide to cause the pH of an aqueous medium to rise above 7.0 (‘371, Paragraph [0048]).
Sakamoto US 2017/0042935 discloses magnesium oxide granules for pharmaceutical applications or for use as a food additive (‘935, Paragraph [0001]) wherein magnesium oxide tablets are widely used as medical laxatives, mineral supplements, etc. (‘935, Paragraph [0002]).
Suzuki et al. US 2011/0104340 discloses a powdered food composition (‘340, Paragraph [0016]) comprising a dessicant of magnesium oxide (‘340, Paragraph [0256]).
Bubnis et al. US 2005/0214383 discloses a nutritional supplement of magnesium dosed in the form of a pharmaceutically acceptable compound including a combination of magnesium oxide and magnesium hydroxide wherein magnesium is used in bone formation and growth, prevents bone loss, relaxes coronary arteries, manages pre-eclampsia, treats cardiac arrhythmias, and manages diabetes (‘383, Paragraph [0064]).
Fuisz et al. US 5,654,003 discloses an antacid compression tablet comprising active antacid ingredients of magnesium oxide and magnesium hydroxide.
Hojo et al. US 2004/0234651 discloses a food additive slurry composition and powder composition utilized for enriching magnesium by adding to foods that are highly concentrated and have the excellent dispersion stability in a solution and food compositions containing these compositions (‘651, Paragraph [0001]) wherein the food additive slurry composition comprises at least one magnesium ingredient of magnesium oxide and magnesium hydroxide (‘651, Paragraphs [0008] and [0022]) wherein magnesium is greatly involved in calcium metabolism (‘651, Paragraph [0002]).
Nadland et al. US 4,959,222 discloses magnesium in the form of various salts is generally a difficult mineral for administration since it provokes a bitter/sour taste which is generally not organoleptically acceptable wherein magnesium hydroxide is a relatively neutral salt as regards to odor and flavor but in a relatively pure state and high concentration has a slightly nauseous flavor wherein magnesium oxide has a slightly alkaline and nauseous flavor and is mostly known and used as an antacid and is also a mild laxative.
Woelfel et al. US 2019/0015383 discloses a composition of agglomerated particles which agglomeration increases flowability and/or solubility of the composition by providing the composition with a lower bulk density and/or larger surface area having many voids and cavities which agglomerated particles provide for a more homogeneous composition and free flowing structure (‘383, Paragraph [0087]).
Likitalo et al. US 2018/0148577 discloses a method for granulating particulate alkaline metal hydroxide and alkaline metal oxides to improve handling and transport of these materials (‘577, Paragraph [0004]) wherein the alkaline earth metal in the particulate alkaline earth metal oxides or alkaline earth metal hydroxides or mixtures thereof is magnesium (‘577, Paragraph [0007]) wherein the amount of the particulate alkaline earth metal oxide or alkaline earth metal hydroxide or mixture thereof ranges from 50 wt% to 99.9 wt% and the amount of the one or more process additives ranges from 50 wt% to 0.1 wt% (‘577, Paragraph [0009]).
Gambin et al. US 2007/0107637 magnesium oxide and hydroxide are mineral solid additives for powdery compounds to improve dynamic flowing of calco-magnesian compounds (‘637, Paragraph [0025]).
Tsutsumi et al. US 4,247,708 discloses a method for rendering an inorganic fine oxide powder hydrophobic and a method for treating the powder which has a hydrophilic property by allowing an oragno-polysiloxane to react with the surface of the powder to change it to be hydrophobic wherein the powdered treated in the method if magnesium oxide.
Brutsch et al. WO 2021/043758 discloses fruit powders for use in the preparation of powdered beverages which fruit powders have good reconstitution properties (‘758, Paragraph [0001]).
Marshman et al. EP 1 792 543 discloses a magnesium fortified food product in the form of beverages (‘543, Paragraph [0035]) wherein magnesium in the form of a water soluble salt or complex is added to food and/or beverages to provide a daily allowance wherein the addition of MG is relatively high in many fortified foods and can cause precipitation of insoluble Mg salts, gelation of sterilized liquid dietary formulas and unacceptable organoleptic changes in the product like lighter color, astringency, or chalky flavor wherein high amounts of MG can destabilize proteins and might cause sedimentation or gelation wherein changes in pH due to the addition of Mg oxide or hydroxide (carbonate) might lead a higher viscosity or even precipitation or sedimentation of other compounds (‘543, Paragraph [0008]).
Frank “8 Uses for Magnesium Oxide (MgO) in Food” <https://www.ulprospector.com/knowledge/2735/fbn-8-uses-for-magnesium-oxide-food/> (published July 10, 2015) discloses magnesium oxide is classified in two forms of white powder based on the temperature and duration of heat used in processing wherein light magnesium oxide has a density of roughly 40-50 mL per 5 g and heavy magnesium oxide is insoluble in alcohol, achieves minimal solubility in water and has increased solubility in weak acids wherein magnesium oxide is hydroscopic and acts as an anti caking agent within dry powdered formulations allowing these products to remain free flowing (Frank, Page 1) wherein the low water solubility of magnesium oxide may result in a white powder seen in products consumers hydrate such as powdered beverage and magnesium is considered an alkaline earth element and has a pH around 10 in solution wherein magnesium is a key component in chlorophyll and magnesium oxide contains 55-60% magnesium and is a relatively inexpensive magnesium fortification (Frank, Page 2).
Van De Walle “8 Types of Magnesium and Their Applications in Food” <https://www.ulprospector.com/knowledge/9096/fbn-8-types-of-magnesium-food-applications/> (published December 7, 2018) discloses magnesium is a mineral that is necessary for good health and has many important functions in the body including regulating muscle and nerve function, blood sugar levels, and blood pressure as well as energy production and bone health and has important roles as a food additive (Van De Walle, Page 1) wherein magnesium oxide is commonly known as magnesia used to regulate pH and prevent caking in bakery products, frozen dairy, canned peas, butter, and cocoa products and magnesium hydroxide has a brand name of milk of magnesia and is used to treat upset stomach and constipation and is widely used as an antacid, laxative, and pH regulator in the food processing industry (Van De Walle, Page 2).
Van De Walle “Anti-caking agents – Function and Form” <https://www.ulprospector.com/knowledge/12363/fb-anti-caking-agents-function-and-form/> (published October 8, 2021) discloses anticaking agents are anhydrous compounds that are added in small amounts to dry foods to prevent the particles from caking together and to ensure the product remains dry and free flowing and function by absorption of excess moisture or by coating particles to make them more water repellant wherein magnesium silicate is often used with powdered mixes.
The prior art made of record, cited on a previous Information Disclosure Statement, and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Saleeb et al. US 4,664,920 discloses a method for fixing/entrapment and/or encapsulation of food ingredients on a magnesium salt substrate wherein the fixation process is accomplished by mixing an aqueous solution of the magnesium salt and the ingredient to be fixed and then drying the mixture wherein the magnesium salt is formed in situ by the addition of a basic magnesium compound of magnesium hydroxide or magnesium oxide to an acid containing solution such as a fruit juice.
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
Prosecution Insights