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 .
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu (CN 110720435-Clarivate Analytics translation).
Regarding claims 1 and 2, Lu discloses a method for cultivating black soldier fly (Hermetia illucens) larvae with selenium-rich feed comprising: (a) combining black soldier fly culture feed and inorganic selenium salt (i.e., sodium selenite) and fermenting to convert at least part of the inorganic selenium into organic selenium and obtain a fermentation product; and (b) feeding the fermentation product to black soldier fly larvae from 2-5 days after hatching for 5-10 days (i.e., 5th instar).
Lu discloses in order to efficiently convert inorganic selenium into organic selenium through the microbial fermentation, the microbial fermentation is conducted at a temperature between 25° and 30°C for 24 to 72 hours using Candida utilis or Bacillus coagulans strain.
While Lu disclose a step of fermenting (cultivating) bacteria in combination with selenium, the reference is silent with regards to first cultivating the bacteria, adding selenium and fermenting with selenium. However, selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results (MPEP §2144.04 IVC). In this case both sequence of steps results in a selenium enriched bacteria solution intended to be combined with black soldier fly larvae feed.
While Lu disclose using Candida utilis or Bacillus coagulans strains to ferment the feed, the reference is silent with respect to intestinal bacterial strains from the black soldier fly. Here, given claim 1 is directed to a method of feeding black soldier larvae with a selenium-rich bacteria solution, the determination of patentability is not based on the source of bacteria, i.e., intestinal.
While Lu disclose cultivating and fermenting feed combined with selenium using bacteria, the reference is silent with respect to the bacteria content before and after cultivation or the added amount of sodium selenite. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to have adjusted, in routine processing, the bacteria count, cultivation and fermentation conditions, and added sodium selenite to obtain an efficient cultivation process, desired black soldier fly larvae growth and black soldier fly with a desired amount of selenium uptake.
Regarding claim 3, Lu discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Given Lu discloses converting inorganic sodium selenite to organic selenium through fermentation, inherently the bacteria solution would comprise non-selenium.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu (CN 110720435-Clarivate Analytics translation) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Wu et al. (CN 116569989 – Clarivate Analytics translation).
Regarding claim 4, Lu discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. While Lu disclose Candida utilis or Bacillus coagulans, the reference is silent with respect to Lactococcus lactis, Lactobacillus acidophilus, Lactobacillus plantarum, Enterococcus faecalis or complex microbial inoculants thereof with Bacillus subtilis.
Wu et al. teach a method of preparing biological organic selenium feed additive comprising the steps of mixing feed with sodium selenite, inoculating with a microbial inoculum comprising Lactobacillus plantarum, Lactobacillus casei and Bifidobacterium animalis and fermenting (Abstract).
Lu and Wu et al. are combinable because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely, preparing selenium-rich feed. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to have used the microbial inoculum of Wu et al in the process of Lu because the combination of bacteria is known to successfully produce a selenium rich feed additive.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu (CN 110720435-Clarivate Analytics translation) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Doane et al. (WO 2021/1195775).
Regarding claim 5, Lu discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Lu discloses the culture feed is a compound feed (i.e., plant-based feed) comprising rice bran, bean dregs, bean pulp and wheat bran.
Lu is silent with respect to a culture feed comprising chicken meal or a plant based feed comprising grass meal and ratio of bran, bean pulp and grass meal as presently claimed.
Doane et al. teach a method for breeding black soldier flies (Abstract). Doane et al. chicken meal, fish meal, mealworm, cricket, corn and soy are known sources of feed for black soldier fly larvae ([0094]).
Lu and Doane et al. are combinable because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely feeding black soldier fly larvae. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have used chicken meal as the feed culture in the method of Lu et al. because Doane et al. teach is it s known feed for black soldier fly larvae.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
-So et al. (“The impact of selenium on insects”, Journal of Economic Entomology, 116 (4), (2023), pp. 1041-1062) teaches the impact of selenium on beneficial insects.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH A GWARTNEY whose telephone number is (571)270-3874. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9 a.m. - 5 p.m. 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, Curtis Mayes can be reached at 571-272-1234. 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.
ELIZABETH A. GWARTNEY
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1759
/ELIZABETH GWARTNEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Prosecution Insights