Case 1:22-cv-00311-WCB Document 147 Filed 07/14/23 Page 1 of 52 PageID #: 14039
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`IMPOSSIBLE FOODS INC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
` v.
`
`MOTIF FOODWORKS, INC.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`C.A. No. 22-311 (WCB)
`
`DECLARATION OF PAUL SARNOSKI, PH.D.
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00311-WCB Document 147 Filed 07/14/23 Page 2 of 52 PageID #: 14040
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`I.
`
`II.
`
`III.
`
`IV.
`
`Introduction and Background ............................................................................................. 1
`
`Qualifications and Experience ............................................................................................ 2
`
`Legal Principles .................................................................................................................. 3
`
`The Food Product Patents ................................................................................................... 4
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`Relevant Background .............................................................................................. 4
`
`Overview of the ’761 Patent ................................................................................... 4
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`The Claims of the ’761 Patent .................................................................... 5
`
`The Specification of the ’761 Patent ........................................................... 6
`
`C.
`
`Overview of the ’096 and ’241 Patents................................................................... 8
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`The Claims of the ’096 and ’241 Patents .................................................... 8
`
`The Shared Specification of the ’096 and ’241 Patents ............................ 11
`
`D.
`
`Overview of the ’306 and ’250 Patents................................................................. 13
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`The Claims of the ’306 and ’250 Patents .................................................. 14
`
`The Shared Specification of the ’306 and ’250 Patents ............................ 16
`
`V.
`
`Analysis of the Disputed Claim Terms ............................................................................. 18
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`E.
`
`Term Nos. 1-4: Non-Animal / Free of Animal / No Animal Products ................. 18
`
`Term Nos. 15-17: Replica ..................................................................................... 24
`
`Term Nos. 21: Molarity ........................................................................................ 31
`
`Term Nos. 7-14: Limitations specifying compounds ........................................... 34
`
`Term Nos. 23-25: Aroma ...................................................................................... 41
`
`i
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00311-WCB Document 147 Filed 07/14/23 Page 3 of 52 PageID #: 14041
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
`
`1.
`
`I, Paul Sarnoski, Ph.D., have been retained as an expert witness by plaintiff
`
`Impossible Foods Inc. (“Impossible”) to provide testimony in the above-captioned litigation
`
`against defendant Motif FoodWorks, Inc. (“Motif”).
`
`2.
`
`I have been asked to provide opinions as to the disputed terms of certain asserted
`
`claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 10,863,761 (“’761 patent”), 9,943,096 (“’096 patent”), 10,039,306
`
`(“’306 patent”), 11,013,250 (“’250 patent”) and 11,224,241 (“’241 patent”) (collectively, the
`
`“Food Product Patents”) based on the understanding of a person of ordinary skill in the art
`
`(“POSA”). The disputed terms and each party’s proposed interpretation of that term are set forth
`
`below.
`
`3.
`
`I have formed my opinions using my education, knowledge, and experience
`
`together with my review of the materials cited in this declaration. I have reviewed the Food
`
`Product Patents and their prosecution histories. I also have considered the parties’ proposed
`
`meanings for the terms discussed below. I have based my opinions in this declaration on the
`
`information currently available to me.
`
`4.
`
`Accordingly, I reserve the right to change, amend, and supplement my opinions in
`
`response to any new information made available to me; additional scientific analysis that leads
`
`me to conclude that supplementation is necessary; new issues that may arise; and any additional
`
`arguments, evidence, or testimony.
`
`5.
`
`I reserve the right to testify with regard to my qualifications, experience, and the
`
`materials I have reviewed. I also reserve the right to respond, as appropriate, to documents,
`
`information, or declarations that Motif produces.
`
`6.
`
`I have not provided either trial or deposition testimony in any cases in the past
`
`four years.
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00311-WCB Document 147 Filed 07/14/23 Page 4 of 52 PageID #: 14042
`
`7.
`
`I have no financial interest in the outcome of this case. I am being compensated at
`
`my standard consulting rate, which is $300 per hour. My compensation is not related in any way
`
`to the outcome of this lawsuit.
`
`II.
`
`QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE
`
`8.
`
`The following is a brief summary of my qualifications and experience, the full
`
`extent of which is in my curriculum vitae, attached to this declaration as Exhibit A.
`
`9.
`
`I currently hold the position of Graduate Program Director and Associate
`
`Professor in the Food Science and Human Nutrition Department at the University of Florida. As
`
`the Graduate Program Director, I serve as an advisor and mentor for graduate and undergraduate
`
`students.
`
`10. My current research focus includes developing fruits and vegetables with
`
`improved flavor through breeding and postharvest processing strategies. I also conducted
`
`research in the area of meat and seafood flavor and quality. I oversee and supervise laboratory
`
`staff.
`
`11.
`
`I have taught at the University of Florida since June 2012. I currently teach
`
`several courses at the University of Florida, including Advanced Food Chemistry; Flavor
`
`Chemistry and Technology; and Instrumental Analysis & Separations.
`
`12.
`
`Prior to joining the University of Florida, I was a Research Food Technologist for
`
`the U.S. Department of Agriculture, focusing on sustainable agriculture.
`
`13.
`
`In 2010, I received my Ph.D in Food Science and Technology from the Virginia
`
`Polytechnic Institute and State University (Virginia Tech). I also received my Master of Science
`
`in Food Science and Technology from Virginia Tech, and I hold a Bachelor of Arts in Chemistry
`
`with a minor in Physics from Wilkes University.
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00311-WCB Document 147 Filed 07/14/23 Page 5 of 52 PageID #: 14043
`
`14.
`
`I have authored or coauthored about 50 peer-reviewed publications and peer-
`
`reviewed book chapters in the area of food chemistry and technology in well-known journals in
`
`the field such as Food Chemistry, Journal of Food Science, Journal of Agricultural and Food
`
`Chemistry, International Journal of Food Engineering, International Journal of Food Science &
`
`Technology, and the Journal of Food Safety.
`
`15.
`
`I regularly attend and present at industry and educational conferences concerning
`
`food science and technology, including the International Association for Food Protection and the
`
`Institute of Food Technologists (IFT) Annual Meeting.
`
`16.
`
`I have also served as an editor and reviewer for over 10 different scientific
`
`journals in the field, including Food Chemistry, the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry,
`
`and the Journal of Food Science.
`
`III.
`
`LEGAL PRINCIPLES
`
`17.
`
`Counsel for Impossible has asked me to offer my opinions on the meaning of
`
`certain terms in the Food Product Patents. I have no formal legal training. In order to form my
`
`opinions on these questions, counsel explained to me the legal standards and general guidelines
`
`relevant to determining the meaning of patent claims. Below, I set forth my understanding of
`
`these standards, which provide the framework for my analysis.
`
`18.
`
`I understand from counsel that patent claims are interpreted from the perspective
`
`of a person of ordinary skill in the art (a “POSA”), in the context of the patent as a whole, as of
`
`the priority date. I understand from counsel that those dates are July 12, 2011 for the ’761 patent
`
`and January 11, 2013 for the ’096, ’241, ’306, and ’250 patents. I have formed my opinions
`
`based on the knowledge and understanding of a POSA as of these dates. I further understand
`
`that a POSA is presumed to have knowledge of all pertinent prior art.
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00311-WCB Document 147 Filed 07/14/23 Page 6 of 52 PageID #: 14044
`
`19.
`
`In forming my opinions, I have considered the qualifications of a POSA based on
`
`my review of the Food Product Patents and their file histories. In my view, a POSA would have
`
`at least a graduate degree in food science, biology, chemistry, or a similar discipline, plus 2 years
`
`of experience as a food scientist. I am at least a POSA under this definition.
`
`20.
`
`I understand that unless the patent claims, the specification, and the prosecution
`
`history indicate otherwise, the claim terms of the Food Product Patents should be given their
`
`plain and ordinary meaning, which is the meaning that the terms would have had to a POSA as
`
`of the relevant date. Counsel has advised me that this analysis focuses on the patent claims, the
`
`specification, and the prosecution history. I also understand that dictionaries or other extrinsic
`
`sources can be helpful in determining the plain and ordinary meaning of a term but cannot
`
`override a meaning that is clear from the patent claims, the specification, and the prosecution
`
`history.
`
`21.
`
`Counsel has informed me that a patent claim may be considered indefinite if, in
`
`the context of the patent specification and prosecution history, it fails to inform a POSA about
`
`the scope of the claimed invention with reasonable certainty.
`
`IV.
`
`THE FOOD PRODUCT PATENTS
`
`A.
`
`22.
`
`Relevant Background
`
`The Food Product Patents relate to the field of food science and methods and
`
`compositions for meat alternative food products.
`
`B.
`
`23.
`
`Overview of the ’761 Patent
`
`I understand that Impossible and Motif disagree about the meaning of certain
`
`terms in the claims of the ’761 patent.
`
`24.
`
`The ’761 patent is entitled “Methods and Compositions for Consumables” and
`
`generally discusses improved methods and compositions that replicate the characteristics that
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00311-WCB Document 147 Filed 07/14/23 Page 7 of 52 PageID #: 14045
`
`consumers value in preparation and consumption of meat food products. The replicas are plant-
`
`based, and thereby overcome some of the negative impacts on human health and the environment
`
`related to meat consumption. The ’761 patent further discusses several replicas—muscle replica,
`
`fat replica, connective tissue replica—which can be assembled into a beef replica product. The
`
`’761 patent also teaches that addition of heme and other compounds (sugars, sulfur-containing
`
`compounds) allows for production and release of volatile compounds upon cooking that mimic
`
`organoleptic properties of meat, thereby improving the consumer experience.
`
`1.
`
`The Claims of the ’761 Patent
`
`25.
`
`Specifically, the ’761 patent claims and describes a “beef replica product
`
`comprising: a) a muscle replica comprising 0.1%-5% of a heme-containing protein, at least one
`
`sugar compound and at least one sulfur compound; and b) a fat tissue replica comprising at least
`
`one plant oil and a denatured plant protein, wherein said muscle replica and fat tissue replica are
`
`assembled in a manner that approximates the physical organization of meat.”
`
`26.
`
`Dependent claim 3 of the ’761 patent is directed to the beef replica product of
`
`claim 1, “wherein the denatured plant protein comprises one or more isolated non-heme-
`
`containing proteins.”
`
`27.
`
`Dependent claim 10 of the ’761 patent is directed to the beef replica product of
`
`claim 1, “wherein said beef product contains less than 5% carbohydrates.”
`
`28.
`
`Dependent claim 11 of the ’761 patent is directed to the beef replica product of
`
`claim 1, “wherein said beef replica product is characterized by one or more of the following:
`
`contains no tofu, contains no soy protein, contains less than 1% cellulose, contains less than 5%
`
`insoluble carbohydrates, or contains no wheat gluten.”
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00311-WCB Document 147 Filed 07/14/23 Page 8 of 52 PageID #: 14046
`
`29.
`
`Dependent claim 12 of the ’761 patent is directed to the beef replica product of
`
`claim 1, “wherein said beef replica product contains no animal products and less than 5%
`
`carbohydrates.”
`
`30.
`
`Dependent claim 13 of the ’761 patent is directed to the beef replica product of
`
`claim 1, “wherein said beef replica product contains no wheat gluten and less than 5% insoluble
`
`carbohydrates.”
`
`2.
`
`The Specification of the ’761 Patent
`
`31.
`
`The ’761 patent describes compositions of consumables that can mimic or
`
`replicate animal-based foods and methods for producing such compositions. ’761 patent, 18:12-
`
`13; 18:28-29. For example, these consumables can be “designed to replicate the experience of
`
`eating meat. The look, texture, and taste of the consumable can be such that it is similar or
`
`indistinguishable from meat.” Id. at 20:17-20. These may replicate, for example, ground beef.
`
`Id. at 46:22-45; Figures 15-16. The ’761 patent further explains how these consumables may
`
`have similar characteristics as traditional meat, which may include the force required to pierce
`
`the consumable as compared to meat. Id. at 21:34-42.
`
`32.
`
`The ’761 patent teaches the consumables may have a similar or the same physical
`
`organization of traditional cuts of meat, which “can be manipulated by controlling the
`
`localization, organization, assembly, or orientation of the muscle, fat, and/or connective tissue
`
`replicas” to mimic meat before and/or after cooking. Id. at 23:24-41. Some of these traditional
`
`cuts of meat replicated can be “different cuts of beef, such as, e.g., ribeye, filet mignon, London
`
`broil, among others.” Id. at 23:37-41.
`
`33.
`
`The ’761 patent explains that these replicas include skeletal muscle replicas, fat
`
`replicas, and connective tissue replicas, which can be designed to replicate the similar structures
`
`in traditional meat. Id. at 25:33-47; 27:9-19; 30:50-63. These may be organized in specific
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00311-WCB Document 147 Filed 07/14/23 Page 9 of 52 PageID #: 14047
`
`fashions to replicate the organization of meat. For example, “in some embodiments the muscle
`
`replica comprises fibers that are to some extent organized isotropically.” Id. at 25:50-53. As
`
`another example, the fat replica “comprises a gel with droplets of fat suspended therein.” Id. at
`
`27:23-25. The ’761 patent teaches that “[a]nimal connective tissue can generally be divided into
`
`fascia-type and cartilage-type tissue. Fascia-type tissue is highly fibrous, resistant against
`
`extension (has high elastic modulus), and has a high protein content, a moderate water content
`
`(ca. 50%), and low-to-none fat and polysaccharide content;” thus, the connective tissue replica
`
`may, for example, “comprise[] about 50% protein by total weight, about 50% by liquid weight,
`
`and has a low fat and polysaccharide component.” Id. at 30:64-31:7.
`
`34.
`
`Importantly, the ’761 patent teaches, for example, that “the meat substitute
`
`products, muscle tissue replica, fat replica, or connective tissue replica, comprise one or more
`
`isolated, purified proteins.” Id. at 23:43-45. These proteins may be “derived from non-animal
`
`sources” which “include plants, funghi, bacteria, archaea, genetically modified organisms such
`
`as genetically modified bacteria or yeast, chemical or in vitro synthesis.” Id. at 23:65-24:3.
`
`35.
`
`Further, the ’761 patent teaches these replicas can contain the components of the
`
`meat they replicate. The patent teaches “animal muscle tissue include[s] sodium, potassium,
`
`calcium, magnesium, other metal ions, lactic acid, other organic acids, free amino acids,
`
`peptides, nucleotides and sulfur compounds” and so, for example, “the muscle replica can
`
`include sodium, potassium, calcium, magnesium, other metal ions, lactic acid, other organic
`
`acids, free amino acids, peptides, nucleotides and sulfur compound.” Id. at 26:31-37. The patent
`
`teaches these components may assist in recreating organoleptic properties of meat cooking. For
`
`example, “[o]dorants released during cooking of meat are generated by reactions that can involve
`
`as reactants fats, protein, amino acids, peptides, nucleotides, organic acids, sulfur compounds,
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00311-WCB Document 147 Filed 07/14/23 Page 10 of 52 PageID #: 14048
`
`sugars and other carbohydrates.” Id. at 36:18-21. These reactions “can be catalyzed by iron, in
`
`particular the heme iron of myoglobin;” thus, for example, “the characteristic flavor and
`
`fragrance components are produced during the cooking process by chemical reactions catalyzed
`
`by iron.” Id. at 36:34-48. These may be produced, for example, by “heme,” “leghemoglobin,”
`
`or more generally “a heme protein.” Id.
`
`C.
`
`36.
`
`Overview of the ’096 and ’241 Patents
`
`I understand that Impossible and Motif disagree about the meaning of certain
`
`terms in the claims of the ’096 and ’241 patents.
`
`37.
`
`The ’096 and ’241 patents are entitled “Methods and Compositions for Affecting
`
`the Flavor and Aroma Profile of Consumables” and generally discuss food products containing
`
`flavor precursors that modulate the flavor and/or aroma profile to mimic meat with a plant based
`
`or meat-like product. The patents also detail compounds that are released on cooking/heating of
`
`such products and the resulting perception of the consumer.
`
`1.
`
`The Claims of the ’096 and ’241 Patents
`
`38.
`
`Specifically, the ’096 patent claims and describes a “food flavor additive
`
`composition comprising: a) an isolated heme-containing protein; b) a compound selected from
`
`glucose, ribose, fructose, lactose, xylose, arabinose, glucose-6-phosphate, maltose, maltodextrin,
`
`and galactose, and mixtures of two or more thereof; and c) a compound selected from cysteine,
`
`cystine, thiamine, methionine, and mixtures of two or more thereof; wherein the flavor additive
`
`composition contains no animal products; and wherein cooking the food flavor additive
`
`composition results in the production of at least two volatile compounds which have a meat-
`
`associated aroma.”
`
`39.
`
`Dependent claim 2 of the ’096 patent is directed to the food flavor additive
`
`composition of claim 1, “wherein the heme-containing protein is selected from the group
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00311-WCB Document 147 Filed 07/14/23 Page 11 of 52 PageID #: 14049
`
`consisting of a androglobin, a cytoglobin, a globin E, a globin X, a globin Y, a hemoglobin, a
`
`myoglobin, a leghemoglobin, an erythrocruorin, a beta hemoglobin, an alpha hemoglobin, a
`
`protoglobin, a cyanoglobin, a cytoglobin, a histoglobin, a neuroglobins, a chlorocruorin, a
`
`truncated hemoglobin, a truncated 2/2 globin, and a hemoglobin 3.”
`
`40.
`
`Dependent claim 3 of the ’096 patent is directed to the food flavor additive
`
`composition of claim 1, “wherein the heme-containing protein comprises amino acid sequence
`
`having at least 80% sequence identity to a polypeptide set forth in SEQ ID NOs: 1-26.”
`
`41.
`
`The ’241 patent has two independent claims, claims 1 and 22, which I describe
`
`below.
`
`42.
`
`Claim 1 recites “[a] meat-like-food product produced by a method comprising:
`
`providing one or more plant proteins; and combining, with the one or more plant proteins: a
`
`composition comprising a heme-containing protein, wherein the composition comprises at least
`
`60% of the heme-containing protein on a dry weight basis; a compound selected from glucose,
`
`ribose, fructose, lactose, xylose, arabinose, glucose-6-phosphate, maltose, and galactose, and
`
`mixtures of two or more thereof; and a compound selected from cysteine, cystine, thiamine,
`
`methionine, and mixtures of two or more thereof in a concentration of at least 1.5 mM; wherein
`
`the meat-like food product is free of animal heme-containing protein; wherein cooking the meat-
`
`like-food-product results in the production of at least two volatile compounds which have a
`
`meat-associated aroma; and wherein the meat-like food product is in a form selected from the
`
`group consisting of a hotdog, a burger, ground meat, a sausage, a steak, a filet, a roast, a
`
`meatball, a meatloaf, or bacon.”
`
`43.
`
`Claim 22 recites: “[a] meat-like-food product produced by a method comprising:
`
`providing one or more plant proteins; and combining, with the one or more plant proteins: a
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00311-WCB Document 147 Filed 07/14/23 Page 12 of 52 PageID #: 14050
`
`heme-containing protein; one or more of glucose, ribose, fructose, lactose, xylose, arabinose,
`
`glucose-6-phosphate, maltose, and galactose; and one or more of cysteine, cystine, thiamine, and
`
`methionine; wherein the meat-like food product is free of animal heme-containing protein;
`
`wherein cooking the meat-like-food-product results in the production of at least two volatile
`
`compounds which have a meat-associated aroma; and wherein the meat-like food product is in a
`
`form selected from the group consisting of a hotdog, a burger, ground meat, a sausage, a steak, a
`
`filet, a roast, a meatball, a meatloaf, or bacon.”
`
`44.
`
`Dependent claim 7 of the ’241 patent is directed to the meat-like-food product of
`
`claim 1, “wherein the heme-containing protein comprises an amino acid sequence having at least
`
`80% sequence identity to a polypeptide set forth in SEQ ID NOs. 1-26.”
`
`45.
`
`Dependent claim 12 of the ’241 patent is directed to the meat-like-food product of
`
`claim 1, “further comprising combining with the one more plant proteins, one or more of a
`
`vegetable oil, an algal oil, sunflower oil, corn oil, soybean oil, palm fruit oil, palm kernel oil,
`
`safflower oil, flaxseed oil, rice bran oil, cottonseed oil, olive oil, canola oil, flaxseed oil, coconut
`
`oil, and mango oil.”
`
`46.
`
`Dependent claim 16 of the ’241 patent is directed to the meat-like-food product of
`
`claim 1, “wherein at least a portion of the meat-like food product, upon cooking, transitions in
`
`color from a pink to red color in a raw or uncooked state to a lighter pink to brown color in a
`
`partially cooked to fully cooked state.”
`
`47.
`
`Dependent claim 17 of the ’241 patent is directed to the meat-like-food product of
`
`claim 1, “wherein cooking the meat-like-food product results in the production of at least five
`
`volatile compounds selected from the group” listed in the claim.
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00311-WCB Document 147 Filed 07/14/23 Page 13 of 52 PageID #: 14051
`
`48.
`
`Dependent claim 20 of the ’241 patent is directed to the meat-like-food product of
`
`claim 1, “wherein the at least two volatile compounds are selected from 2-methyl-furan, bis(2-
`
`methyl-3-furyl)disulfide, 2-pentyl-furan, 3,3′-dithiobis-2-methyl-furan, 2,5-dimethyl-pyrazine, 2-
`
`methyl-3-furanthiol, dihydro-3-(2H)-thiophenone, 5-methyl-2-thiophenecarboxaldehyde, 3-
`
`methyl-2-thiophenecarboxaldehyde, 2-methyl-thiazole, dimethyl sulfide, decanal, 5-
`
`ethyldihydro-2(3H)-furanone, dihydro-5-pentyl-2(3H)-furanone, 2-octanone, 3,5-octadien-2-one,
`
`p Cresol, p cresol, and hexanoic acid.”
`
`49.
`
`Dependent claim 23 of the ’241 patent is directed to the meat-like-food product of
`
`claim 22, “wherein the meat-like food product is free of animal products.”
`
`2.
`
`The Shared Specification of the ’096 and ’241 Patents
`
`50.
`
`I am informed by counsel that the ’096 and ’241 patents have a shared
`
`specification. For simplicity, I will reference the ’241 patent in the discussion that follows.
`
`51.
`
`The ’096 and ’241 patents describe “methods and materials for modulating the
`
`taste and/or aroma profile of food products,” which include “compositions containing one or
`
`more flavor precursors and one or more highly conjugated heterocyclic rings complexed to an
`
`iron (referred to herein as an iron complex),” where “[s]uch iron complexes include heme
`
`moieties or other highly conjugated heterocylic rings complexed to an iron ion.” ’241 patent at
`
`7:65-8:6. The patents teach “‘[h]eme” refers to a prosthetic group bound to iron (Fe′ or Fe′) in
`
`the center of a porphyrin ring” such that “an iron complex can be a heme moiety, or” other
`
`compounds complexed to an iron ion. Id. at 8:6-12. This heme moiety can then “be used to
`
`modulate the taste and/or aroma profile of food products.” Id. at 8:12-15. For example, “the
`
`iron complexes catalyze some reactions and produce flavor precursors” with or without cooking.
`
`Id. at 8:23-29.
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00311-WCB Document 147 Filed 07/14/23 Page 14 of 52 PageID #: 14052
`
`52.
`
`The patents contain examples of flavor precursors, including “sugars, sugar
`
`alcohols, sugar derivatives, oils (e.g., vegetable oils), free fatty acids, alpha-hydroxy acids,
`
`dicarboxylic acids, amino acids and derivatives thereof, nucleosides, nucleotides, vitamins,
`
`peptides, protein hydrolysates, extracts, phospholipids, lecithin, and organic molecules.” Id. at
`
`8:28-34; Table 1. The patents teach such “[f]lavor precursor molecules or compositions can be
`
`added to the uncooked food product in purified form and/or can be derived from ingredients in
`
`the uncooked consumable food product that contain and/or are enriched with one or more of the
`
`particular flavor precursors or compositions” and that these can include, for example, extracts
`
`and/or oils. Id. at 2:55-64.
`
`53.
`
`The patents define the term “heme containing protein” as interchangeable with
`
`“heme containing polypeptide” or “heme protein” or “heme polypeptide” and further defines the
`
`terms as including “any polypeptide that can covalently or noncovalently bind a heme moiety.”
`
`Id. at 9:17-21. The patents teach heme containing proteins may be derived or isolated from
`
`various sources, including “fungi such as . . . Pichia pastoris” and “bacteria such as Escherichia
`
`coli.” Id. at 10:5-11. The patents also give examples of such proteins through sequence
`
`identities to certain amino acid sequences. Id. at 10:30-58.
`
`54.
`
`Food products as described in the ’096 and ’241 patents “containing one or more
`
`flavor precursors and one or more heme-containing proteins can be used as a base for
`
`formulating a variety of additional food products” or may even “modulate the taste and/or aroma
`
`profile of other food products (e.g., meat replicas, meat substitutes, tofu, mock duck or other
`
`gluten based vegetable product, textured vegetable protein such as textured soy protein, pork,
`
`fish, lamb, or poultry products such as chicken or turkey products)” such that they “can provide a
`
`particular meaty taste and smell, for example, the taste and smell of beef or bacon, to a non-meat
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00311-WCB Document 147 Filed 07/14/23 Page 15 of 52 PageID #: 14053
`
`product or to a poultry product.” Id. at 18:12-31. The patent also provides examples of such
`
`food products, for example a replica burger. Id. at Example 1.
`
`55.
`
`The patents explain that these food products “can be assessed using trained human
`
`panelists,” and such “evaluations can involve eyeing, feeling, chewing, and tasting of the product
`
`to judge product appearance, color, integrity, texture, flavor, and mouth feel, etc.” Id. at 18:63-
`
`19:1. The patents describe how “[a] scale can be used to rate the overall acceptability or quality
`
`of the food product or specific quality attributes such [as] beefiness, texture, and flavor.” Id. at
`
`19:7-10. The patents also give other examples of assessment “based upon olfactometer
`
`readings,” which “can be used to assess odor concentration and odor thresholds, odor
`
`suprathresholds with comparison to a reference gas, hedonic scale scores to determine the degree
`
`of appreciation, or relative intensity of odors.” Id. at 19:13-28. As another example, “volatile
`
`chemicals identified using GCMS can be evaluated” to “further refine the profile of flavor and
`
`aroma compounds produced using a heme-containing protein and one or more flavor
`
`precursors.” Id. at 19:29-34, Table 12.
`
`56.
`
`The ’096 and ’241 patents teach that “[c]haracteristic flavor and fragrance
`
`components are mostly produced during the cooking process by chemical reactions molecules
`
`including amino acids, fats and sugars which are found in plants as well as meat.” Id. at 19:35-
`
`38. Thus, the patent gives examples of testing that may be conducted before or after cooking to
`
`determine the similarity of the food product to meat. Id. at 19:38-64. These testing methods are
`
`further set forth in examples, such as Examples 8-10. Id. at 26:57-37:20.
`
`D.
`
`57.
`
`Overview of the ’306 and ’250 Patents
`
`I understand that Impossible and Motif disagree about the meaning of certain
`
`terms in the claims of the ’306 and ’250 patents.
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00311-WCB Document 147 Filed 07/14/23 Page 16 of 52 PageID #: 14054
`
`58.
`
`The ’306 and ’250 patents are entitled “Methods and Compositions for
`
`Consumables” and generally discuss meat replicas that can contain a muscle, fat, and connective
`
`tissue analog s which contain other ingredients to better simulate the consumption of meat, and
`
`methods of making these replicas.
`
`1.
`
`The Claims of the ’306 and ’250 Patents
`
`59.
`
`The ’306 patent has three independent claims, claims 1, 14, and 27, which I
`
`describe below.
`
`60.
`
`Claim 1 recites “[a] method for imparting a beef-like aroma to a meat replica
`
`matrix, wherein the meat replica matrix comprises one or more plant proteins, a sugar selected
`
`from glucose, ribose, sucrose, fructose, xylose, maltodextrin, and combinations thereof, and at
`
`least one sulfur compound selected from methionine, cysteine and thiamine, the method
`
`comprising adding 0.01%-5% (by weight of the meat replica matrix) of a non-animal heme-
`
`containing protein to the meat replica matrix, wherein, upon cooking of the meat replica matrix,
`
`at least two volatile compounds are generated that are associated with a beef-like aroma, thereby
`
`imparting a beef-like aroma to the meat replica matrix.”
`
`61.
`
`Claim 14 recites “[a] method for making a meat replica matrix having a beef-like
`
`aroma, wherein the meat replica matrix comprises one or more plant proteins, a sugar selected
`
`from glucose, ribose, sucrose, fructose, xylose, maltodextrin, and combinations thereof, and at
`
`least one sulfur compound selected from methionine, cysteine and thiamine, the method
`
`comprising obtaining a non-animal heme-containing protein; and incorporating 0.01%-5% (by
`
`weight of the meat replica matrix) of the non-animal heme-containing protein into the meat
`
`replica matrix, wherein, upon cooking of the meat replica matrix, at least two volatile
`
`compounds are generated that are associated with a beef-like aroma.”
`
`14
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-00311-WCB Document 147 Filed 07/14/23 Page 17 of 52 PageID #: 14055
`
`62.
`
`Claim 27 recites “[a] method for making a meat replica matrix having a beef-like
`
`aroma, wherein the meat replica matrix comprises one or more plant proteins, a sugar selected
`
`from glucose, ribose, sucrose, fructose, xylose, maltodextrin, and combinations thereof, and at
`
`least one sulfur compound selected from methionine, cysteine and thiamine, the method
`
`comprising incorporating 0.01%-5% (by weight of the meat replica matrix) of a non-animal
`
`heme-containing protein into the meat replica matrix, wherein, upon cooking of the meat replica
`
`matrix, at least two volatile compounds are generated that are associated with a beef-like aroma.”
`
`63.
`
`Dependent claim 18 of the ’306 patent is directed to the method of claim 14,
`
`“comprising incorporating 0.4-1% (by weight of the meat replica matrix) of the non-animal
`
`heme-containing protein into the meat replica matrix.”
`
`64.
`
`Dependent claim 24 of the ’306 patent is directed to the method of claim 14,
`
`“wherein the non-animal heme-containing protein is purified.”
`
`65.
`
`Dependent claim 31 of the ’306 patent is directed to the method of claim 27,
`
`“comprising incorporating 0.4%-1% (by weight of the meat replica matrix) of the non-animal
`
`heme-containing protein into the meat replica matrix.”
`
`66.
`
`The ’250 patent has two independent claims, claims 1 and 13, which I describe
`
`below.
`
`67.
`
`Claim 1 recites “[a] meat replica matrix comprising: one or more plant proteins; a
`
`sugar selected from glucose, ribose, sucrose, fructose, xylose, maltodextrin, and combinations
`
`thereof; at least one