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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: please update the priority statement at the beginning of the Specification.
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 22, 23 and 27-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 22 recites the limitation "a hop bittering acid" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Applicant is advised to consider stating "the hop bittering acid".
Claim 23 recites the limitation "a hop bittering acid" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Applicant is advised to consider stating "the hop bittering acid".
Claim 27 recites the limitation "lupulone" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Applicant is advised to consider stating "the lupulone".
Claim 27 recites the limitation "colupulone" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Applicant is advised to consider stating "the colupulone".
Claim 27 recites the limitation "adlupulone" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Applicant is advised to consider stating "the adlupulone".
Claim 29 recites the limitation "the un-isomerized acid" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Applicant is advised to consider stating "the un-isomerized acids".
Claim 30 recites the limitation "an oil" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Applicant is advised to consider stating "the oil".
Claim 30 recites the limitation "an emulsifier" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Applicant is advised to consider stating "the emulsifier".
Claim 30 recites the limitation "a terpene" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Applicant is advised to consider stating "the terpene".
Claim 30 recites the limitation "water" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Applicant is advised to consider stating "the water".
Clarification and/or correction required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 21, 30, 31, and 33-35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Flemmens et al. (US 2021/0340472).
Regarding Claim 21, Flemmens (‘472) teaches an emulsified composition (See Abs., para. 53, FIG-1, claims.)
PNG
media_image1.png
678
530
media_image1.png
Greyscale
comprising: a flavorant matrix comprising a flavorant additive emulsified into a carrier system (See para. 53.); and a hop material infused with the flavorant matrix (See para. 53.); wherein: the flavorant additive comprises a hop bittering acid (See claim 10.), a hop oil (See claims 1, 2 and 4.); the hop material comprises hop pellets (See claim 4.); and the carrier system comprises an emulsifier (See para. 53, ester gum emulsifier.).
Regarding Claim 30, Flemmens (‘472) teaches wherein the carrier system comprises an oil, an emulsifier, a terpene, and water (See paras. 53, 61 and claims 1 and 4.).
Regarding Claim 31, Flemmens (‘472) teaches wherein the carrier system comprises the emulsifier and the emulsifier comprises xanthan gum (See para. 94.).
Regarding Claim 33, Flemmens (‘472) teaches wherein the carrier system comprises the terpene, and the terpene comprises α-bisabolol, borneol, carene, geraniol, limonene, linalool, myrcene, α-pinene, terpinolene (See para. 61, claims 1 and 4.).
Regarding Claim 34, Flemmens (‘472) teaches wherein the flavorant matrix further comprises a
weighting agent (See paras. 25, 28, 31, 32, 47, 48, 53 and 54.).
Regarding Claim 35, Flemmens (‘472) teaches wherein the composition is an edible composition (See Abs.).
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.
Claim(s) 22-24, 28, 29, and 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flemmens et al. (US 2021/0340472).
Regarding Claim 22, Flemmens (‘472) teaches the composition discussed above including wherein the flavorant additive comprises a hop bittering acid (See claims 1 and 10.), however, fails to expressly disclose wherein the flavorant additive comprises about 10% by weight or more of a hop bittering acid.
Applicant does not set forth any non-obvious unexpected results for providing one amount of acid over another. The claimed range is very broad and includes virtually all conceivable amounts. It would have been within the skill set of a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the earliest effective filing date to select an amount of hop bittering acid that is effective to provide a food with the desired profile.
Regarding Claim 23, Flemmens (‘472) teaches wherein hop bittering acid comprises an alpha acid, a beta acid, an isomerized acid, or an un-isomerized acid (See claims 1 and 10.).
Regarding Claim 24, Flemmens (‘472) teaches wherein the hop bittering acid comprises the alpha acid (See claims 1 and 10.).
Regarding Claim 28, Flemmens (‘472) teaches wherein the hop bittering acid comprises the un-isomerized acids (See claims 1 and 10.).
Regarding Claim 29, Flemmens (‘472) teaches wherein the un-isomerized acid comprises an emulsified un-isomerized bittering acid or a non-emulsified un-isomerized bittering acid (See claims 1 and 10.).
Regarding Claim 32, Flemmens (‘472) teaches wherein the carrier system comprises the oil (See FIG-1, para. 53.), however, fails to expressly disclose the oil comprises argan oil, coconut oil, jojoba oil, or a medium chain triglyceride oil (MCT).
It would have been foreseeable, obvious and within the skill set of a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the earliest effective filing date to select any known food grade oil that is effective to provide a food with the desired profile.
Claim(s) 25-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flemmens et al. (US 2021/0340472) in view of Beddie (US 2022/0017838).
Regarding Claim 25, Flemmens (‘472) teaches the composition discussed above including alpha acid (See claims 1 and 10.), however, fails to expressly disclose wherein the alpha acid comprises humulone, cohumulone, adhumulone, or posthumulone.
Beddie (‘838) teaches a similar composition as taught by Flemmens (‘472) wherein the alpha acid comprises humulone for the purpose of proving a hops food with desired flavor (See paras. 2 and 91.).
It would have been foreseeable, obvious and within the skill set of a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the earliest effective filing date to select humulone as the alpha acid to provide a food of desired profile.
Regarding Claim 26, Flemmens (‘472) teaches wherein the hop bittering acid comprises the beta acid (See claims 1 and 10.).
Regarding Claim 27, Flemmens (‘472) teaches the composition discussed above including beta acid (See claims 1 and 10.), however, fails to expressly disclose wherein the beta acid comprises lupulone, colupulone, or adlupulone.
Beddie (‘838) teaches a similar composition as taught by Flemmens (‘472) wherein the beta acid comprises lupulone for the purpose of proving a hops food with desired flavor (See paras. 2 and 91.).
It would have been foreseeable, obvious and within the skill set of a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the earliest effective filing date to select lupulone as the beta acid to provide a food of desired profile.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRENT T O'HERN whose telephone number is (571)272-6385. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 5:00 am - 3:30 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Emily Le can be reached at 571-272-0903. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BRENT T O'HERN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1793 June 18, 2026
Prosecution Insights