Pre-Grant Publication Number: 20110092432
Please help the USPTO examine the application by evaluating the relevance of the publicly submitted prior art to the patent application.
Peer To Patent forwards the Top 10 most relevant prior art submissions and their annotations to the USPTO.
Review this prior art and click on the thumbs up (or down) to indicate whether this submission should be forwarded to the USPTO.
If you login then you can add an annotation by typing in the box at the bottom of the screen to comment on the relevance of the prior art to the claims of the patent application.
Review this prior art and click on the thumbs up (or down) to indicate whether this submission should be forwarded to the USPTO.
If you login then you can add an annotation by typing in the box at the bottom of the screen to comment on the relevance of the prior art to the claims of the patent application.
Prior Art Detail
Summary / Description
| Summary / Description | Using Java tilapia skin as raw material, cutting said Java tilapia skin, adding n-hexane, defatting, using NaOH solution to remove heteroprotein, using acetic acid solution to extract collagen protein, concentrating and freeze-drying so as to obtain collagen. The method for preparing collagen protein by using extracted collagen includes the following steps: adding water to dissolve the collagen, then utilizing proteinase to make zymolysis, concentrating and spray-drying so as to obtain hydrolytic collagen protein. |
Basic Information
| Type of Prior Art | Issued Patents - US |
| Country | China |
| Patent/Application # | 1903918 |
| Kind Code | China (CN) - Unexamined APPLIC. open to Pub... - A |
| Patentee Name | Southern Institute of Technology |
| Relevant Pages, Columns, or Lines | Line 2, 11, 20, Page 8 of Spec |
| URL | http://www7.drugfuture.com/cnpa... |
| Filing Date | July 31, 2006 |
| Additional Information | |
Notes / To Do
| Notes | |
Excerpt
Excerpt In the spec, it's disclosed that the molecular weight may be 500-20000 and more than 40% of the molecular weight are in 2000-7000. It's also said in the spec that the collagen protein may be used for cosmetic materials.
So the only difference with claim 1 may be the molecular weight, which is 3000 in the patent. However, the difference is disclosed in another prior art - http://www.harnisch.com/well/files/pdf/306/hydrolyzed_collagen.pdf
|
Relevance
Claims
1
Relevance
The publication disclosed using fish skin to extract collagen with the molecular weight around 2000-5000, however the other prior art disclosed the difference - http://www.harnisch.com/well/files/pdf/306/hydrolyzed_collagen.pdf
The publication disclosed using fish skin to extract collagen with the molecular weight around 2000-5000, however the other prior art disclosed the difference - http://www.harnisch.com/well/files/pdf/306/hydrolyzed_collagen.pdf
Claim Chart
All
5
Relevance
The publication disclosed using fish skin to extract collagen with the molecular weight around 2000-5000,however the other prior art disclosed the difference - http://www.harnisch.com/well/files/pdf/306/hydrolyzed_collagen.pdf
The publication disclosed using fish skin to extract collagen with the molecular weight around 2000-5000,however the other prior art disclosed the difference - http://www.harnisch.com/well/files/pdf/306/hydrolyzed_collagen.pdf
Claim Chart
All
0 days left
