Ex Parte Thorpe et al - Page 2

                Appeal 2007-3418                                                                               
                Application 11/032,390                                                                         

                      According to Appellants, the invention is directed to the discovery                      
                that high amylose starches can provide substantially shortened reconstitution                  
                (finish frying) times when used in aqueous suspensions to coat potato strips                   
                at uncommonly low solids pickup levels (Br. 4).  Independent claim 24 is                       
                illustrative of the invention and a copy of this claim is reproduced below:                    
                      24.  A method for producing a frozen potato product which comprises                      
                the steps of:                                                                                  
                      cutting the raw potatoes;                                                                
                      blanching the potatoes;                                                                  
                      coating the potatoes with an aqueous suspension of a high amylose                        
                starch selected from the group consisting of high amylose rice starch and                      
                high amylose maize starch;                                                                     
                      wherein the high amylose starch is applied in an aqueous suspension                      
                such that the solids pick up on the potato ranges from 0.3% to 3%;                             
                      parfrying the coated potatoes in hot oil; and                                            
                      freezing the potatoes.                                                                   

                      The Examiner has relied on the following prior art references as                         
                evidence of obviousness:                                                                       
                Murray                            US Re. 27,531                                Dec. 12, 1972   
                Villwock                         US 6,800,311 B2                            Oct. 05, 2004      
                                           ISSUES ON APPEAL                                                    
                      Claims 24-30 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable                     
                over Murray in view of Villwock (Answer 3).                                                    



                                                      2                                                        

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013