Inter Partes Review of US 10,010,567
`Ex. 2001, Jaczynski Declaration
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`RIMFROST AS
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`AKER BIOMARINE ANTARCTIC AS
`Patent Owner
`
`
`CASE IPR: IPR2020-01534
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,010,567 B2
`
`Declaration of Dr. Jacek Jaczynski
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`AKER EXHIBIT 2001 PAGE 0001
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of US 10,010,567
`Ex. 2001, Jaczynski Declaration
`
`
`
`
`
`
`I, Jacek Jaczynski, Ph.D., declare as follows:
`
`1. My experience and qualifications are summarized in my curriculum vitae, a
`
`copy of which is attached hereto as Appendix A.
`
`2. I have been asked by counsel to review relevant materials and render my
`
`expert opinion in connection with technical matters related to the petition for inter
`
`partes review of U.S. Patent 10,010,567 ("the '567 patent"). I understand that the
`
`parties involved in this IPR proceeding are the Petitioner, Rimfrost AS
`
`("Rimfrost"), and the Patent Owner, Aker BioMarine Antarctic AS ("Aker").
`
`3. I am being compensated for my time in connection with developing and
`
`rendering my opinions in this matter at the rate of $500/hour. However, my
`
`compensation is not dependent on the outcome of this proceeding. I am not an
`
`employee, consultant, or contractor of either party.
`
`4. I understand that Rimfrost is seeking cancellation of various claims of the
`
`'567 patent based on the argument that such claims would have been obvious in
`
`view of the teachings of the prior art. I understand that the specific grounds are as
`
`follows:
`
`
`
`2
`
`AKER EXHIBIT 2001 PAGE 0002
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of US 10,010,567
`Ex. 2001, Jaczynski Declaration
`
`
`
`
`Ground 1: Claims 1-5, 7-11 and 15-17 are alleged to be obvious under 35
`
`U.S.C. 103(a) over the combination of Sampalis I, Bottino II and Randolph;
`
`
`
`Ground 2: Claims 6, 14 and 20 are alleged to be obvious under 35 U.S.C.
`
`103(a) over the combination of Sampalis I, Bottino II, Randolph and Breivik
`
`II;
`
`
`
`Ground 3: Claims 12 and 18 are alleged to be obvious under 35 U.S.C.
`
`103(a) over the combination of Sampalis I, Bottino II, Randolph and Bottino
`
`I;
`
`
`
`Ground 4: Claims 13 and 19 are alleged to be obvious under 35 U.S.C.
`
`103(a) over the combination of Sampalis I, Bottino II, Randolph, Fricke,
`
`Yamaguchi and Hardardottir;
`
`5.
`
`In order to render my opinions in this matter, I have reviewed the following
`
`materials:
`
`• The '567 patent (Ex. 1001);
`
`
`
`3
`
`AKER EXHIBIT 2001 PAGE 0003
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of US 10,010,567
`Ex. 2001, Jaczynski Declaration
`
`
`
`
`• The declaration of Rimfrost's expert, Dr. Tallon (Ex. 1006) and the
`
`following Exhibits referred to therein: Exs. 1007, 1008, 1010; 1011, 1012,
`
`1032, 1033, 1035, 1036, 1037 and 1038;
`
`• Ex. 2002 (Freeman and West);
`
`• Ex. 2003 (Retardation factor definition);
`
`• Ex. 2019 (Tallon Deposition Testimony);
`
`• Any other materials referenced directly or indirectly in my
`
`declaration.
`
`6.
`
`Throughout this Declaration, I refer to my understanding of certain legal
`
`standards. I have been informed of these legal standards by Aker’s attorneys. I am
`
`not an attorney, and I am relying only on instructions from Akers’ attorneys for
`
`these legal standards. I have applied these understandings in my analysis as
`
`detailed below.
`
`I. RELEVANT FIELD AND DESCRIPTION OF PERSON HAVING
`
`ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`
`7. The relevant field for the '567 patent includes extraction of lipids from
`
`natural sources. I consider myself to be an expert in the relevant field.
`
`
`
`4
`
`AKER EXHIBIT 2001 PAGE 0004
`
`

`

`
`
`8. I understand that Rimfrost has argued that as of the priority date of the '567
`
`Inter Partes Review of US 10,010,567
`Ex. 2001, Jaczynski Declaration
`
`Patent, a Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art (POSITA) would have held an
`
`advanced degree in marine sciences, biochemistry, organic (especially lipid)
`
`chemistry, chemical or process engineering, or associated sciences with
`
`complementary understanding, either through education or experience, of organic
`
`chemistry and in particular lipid chemistry, chemical or process engineering,
`
`marine biology, nutrition, or associated sciences; and knowledge of or experience
`
`in the field of extraction. In addition, a POSITA would have had at least five years'
`
`applied experience. For the purposes of this proceeding, I will accept that
`
`definition of a POSITA.
`
`II. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`
`9. I understand that the meanings of the claim terms are to be understood from
`
`the perspective of a POSITA. I understand that claim construction begins with the
`
`ordinary and customary meanings of the terms used in the claims. I further
`
`understand that the meanings of terms used in the claims should be understood
`
`primarily in view of the intrinsic record, including the specification and file
`
`history. I further understand that IPR proceedings on petitions filed after
`
`November 13, 2018 do not utilize the broadest reasonable broadest reasonable
`
`interpretation standard.
`
`
`
`5
`
`AKER EXHIBIT 2001 PAGE 0005
`
`

`

`
`
`10. I understand that the first step in analyzing Rimfrost's grounds for
`
`Inter Partes Review of US 10,010,567
`Ex. 2001, Jaczynski Declaration
`
`unpatentability is to determine the meaning of the terms in the involved claims of
`
`the '567 patent.
`
`11. Rimfrost offer the following construction of terms contained in the claims:
`
`• “krill oil” means “lipids extracted from krill.”
`
`• “astaxanthin ester” means “[a]n astaxanthin molecule in which one or both
`
`of the hydroxyl groups are replaced by a fatty acid tail connected to the
`
`astaxanthin molecule through an ester bond.”
`
`• “phytonutrient” means “a plant-derived compound that has a positive impact
`
`on human health or nutrition.”
`
`12.
`
`It is my opinion that the terms of the claims should be given their plain and
`
`ordinary meaning. For the purposes of this declaration, I will accept Rimfrost’s
`
`construction of the claim terms.
`
`III. ANALYSIS OF RIMFROST'S PROPOSED GROUNDS FOR
`
`INVALIDITY
`
`13. I understand that a claim of an issued patent can be found to be invalid if the
`
`claim would have been obvious in view of the prior art. I understand that this
`
`
`
`6
`
`AKER EXHIBIT 2001 PAGE 0006
`
`

`

`
`
`determination is made from the perspective of a person having ordinary skill in the
`
`Inter Partes Review of US 10,010,567
`Ex. 2001, Jaczynski Declaration
`
`art who is presumed to be aware of all prior art.
`
`14. I further understand that the determination of obviousness involves
`
`consideration of the scope and content of the prior art, the differences between the
`
`prior art and the claims, and the level of ordinary skill in the art. I also understand
`
`that secondary factors of non-obviousness can be considered, such as commercial
`
`success, long-felt but unsolved needs, failure of others, industry praise, etc.
`
`15.
`
`I understand that a POSITA provides a reference point from which the prior
`
`art and claimed invention should be viewed. This reference point prevents one
`
`from using his or her own insight or hindsight in deciding whether a claim is
`
`obvious. Thus, “hindsight reconstruction” cannot be used to combine references
`
`together to reach a conclusion of obviousness.
`
`16. I have been asked to give my opinions as to whether Claims 1-20 of the '567
`
`Patent would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art in
`
`accordance with the grounds set forth by Rimfrost in its petition.
`
`17. Claims 1 and 15 of the '567 Patent are independent claims. Claims 2-14 of
`
`the '567 Patent are all dependent on Claim 1, and claims 16-20 of the '567 Patent
`
`are all dependent on Claim 15.
`
`
`
`7
`
`AKER EXHIBIT 2001 PAGE 0007
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Independent Claim 1 reads as follows:
`
`Inter Partes Review of US 10,010,567
`Ex. 2001, Jaczynski Declaration
`
`1.
`
`Encapsulated krill oil comprising a capsule containing Euphausia
`
`superba krill oil suitable for oral administration, said krill oil comprising
`
`greater than 30% phosphatidylcholine w/w of said krill oil, less than 3% free
`
`fatty acids w/w of said krill oil and astaxanthin esters.
`
`Independent Claim 15 reads as follows:
`
`15. Encapsulated krill oil comprising a soft gel capsule containing Euphausia
`
`superba krill oil suitable for oral administration, said krill oil comprising
`
`greater than 30% phosphatidylcholine w/w of said krill oil, less than 3% free
`
`fatty acids w/w of said krill oil, less than about 3% lysophosphatidylcholine
`
`w/w of said krill oil and at least 100 mg/kg astaxanthin esters.
`
`
`
`18. Both independent claims are included in Ground 1. As explained in detail
`
`below, it is my opinion that that the references cited in Ground 1 do not teach or
`
`suggest the claim element of “less than 3% free fatty acids.” Specifically, Rimfrost
`
`contends that Bottino II provides the “less than 3% free fatty acid” limitation.
`
`Rimfrost and its expert have misinterpreted the data in Bottino II.
`
`19. Ground 1 advanced by Rimfrost applies to independent claim 1 and
`
`dependent claims 2-10, which depend on claim 1. The remaining Grounds (2, 3
`
`
`
`8
`
`AKER EXHIBIT 2001 PAGE 0008
`
`

`

`
`
`and 4) apply to claims that are dependent on the claims addressed in Ground 1. I
`
`Inter Partes Review of US 10,010,567
`Ex. 2001, Jaczynski Declaration
`
`understand that where the references combined against Ground 1 do not render that
`
`claim obvious, the dependent claims are not obvious either.
`
`A. Ground 1 fails because the combined references do not teach each
`
`element of the claims
`
`24. I understand that Rimfrost asserts that Claims 1-5, 7-11 and 15-17 are
`
`alleged to be obvious under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the combination of Sampalis I,
`
`Bottino II and Randolph. I understand that Rimfrost made the following argument
`
`in its Petition:
`
`As detailed previously, Table 2 of Bottino II discloses a Euphausia superba
`extract with 48% phosphatidylcholine and at most 2% free fatty acids.
`Exhibit 1038, p. 0003; supra, pp. 21-22.5 Tallon Decl. (Exhibit 1006), ¶ 174.
`
`Petition at 46. Rimfrost further argued:
`
`Table 2 also discloses that “unknowns” constituted 2 ± 22 (i.e., 2 ± 22%) of
`
`that krill extract. Since free fatty acids would be included in this “unknown”
`
`fraction, the free fatty acid content of this extract would be at most 2%.
`
`Tallon Decl. (Exhibit 1006), ¶ 174. Notably, the free fatty acid content
`
`disclosed in Bottino II is consistent with Fricke’s disclosure of a krill extract
`
`with 1-3% free fatty acids. Exhibit 1010, pp. 0002-0003. See Tallon Decl.
`
`(Exhibit 1006), ¶¶ 171-176.
`
`
`
`9
`
`AKER EXHIBIT 2001 PAGE 0009
`
`

`

`
`
`Petition at 22. The reliance on Bottino II for the claim element of “less than 3%
`
`Inter Partes Review of US 10,010,567
`Ex. 2001, Jaczynski Declaration
`
`free fatty acids” is demonstrated by reference to Petitioner’s claim charts, excerpts
`
`of which are provided here for claim 1:
`
`
`
`
`
`And claim 15:
`
`25. At ¶174 of his Declaration, Dr. Tallon makes the following observations
`
`with respect to Table 2 of Bottino II:
`
`174. Bottino II Table 2 provides a breakdown of the lipids of two types of
`krill: E. superba and E. crystallorophias, and discloses extracted Euphausia
`superba polar krill oil containing 58% total phospholipids, 48%
`phosphatidylcholine (PC), 36% triglycerides, 1% lysophosphatidylcholine
`(Lyso PC) by weight of krill oil, and 2% Unknown.
`
`Dr. Tallon goes on to argue:
`
`
`
`10
`
`AKER EXHIBIT 2001 PAGE 0010
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of US 10,010,567
`Ex. 2001, Jaczynski Declaration
`
`
`
`
`The ‘Unknown’ lipid fraction in Bottino II Table 2 is noted in the footnote
`as presenting between the triglyceride and diglyceride fractions, and that the
`amount recovered was too small to characterize further. A POSITA would
`understand that, while not identified, this fraction would include any free
`fatty acids that are present in the krill lipids. Thus Bottino II discloses a free
`fatty acid content for Station 11 of at most 2%.
`
`
`
`26. The data reported in Table II of Bottino II was obtained by a Thin Layer
`
`Chromatography (TLC) method described in Freeman and West 1966 (Ex. 2002).
`
`In TLC, compounds in a sample are separated on a thin layer of adsorbent material,
`
`typically a coating of silica gel on a glass plate or plastic sheet. As disclosed in
`
`Bottino II:
`
`For quantitative fractionation of lipid classes 20-40 mg of lipids were
`separated by the method of Freeman & West (1966) modified as follows: (a)
`Silica gel without binder (Adsorbosil-5, Applied Science) was used instead
`of silica gel-G. (b) Acetic acid was eliminated from the solvent mixture No.
`1 to simplify the drying between developments. (c) Quantitation of the spots
`was done by gravimetry and not by colorimetry of dichromate reduction.
`The gravimetric estimation required the use of the following procedure:
`Once separated by TLC and located with dichlorofluorescein spray, the spots
`were scraped off the plates, extracted six times with 4 ml (each) of a mixture
`of chloroform-methanol-acetic acid-water (50 : 39 : 1 : 10, v/v) (Arvidson,
`1968). The extracts were filtered through fine pore sintered glass funnels
`into test-tubes, then 8 ml of 4 M ammonium hydroxide were added and the
`mixture shaken and centrifuged. The resulting upper phase, which contained
`the DCF, was discarded and to the lower phase was added 8 ml of 50% (v/v)
`methanol in water. After the addition of anhydrous sodium sulfate, the liquid
`was filtered through a fine pore sintered glass funnel containing a layer of
`anhydrous sodium sulfate. The filtrate was then evaporated under vacuum
`and the residue was weighed. Using known amounts of total lipids in each
`determination, it was possible to estimate the recovery. Any result showing
`less than 80 per cent recovery was discarded and the fractionation repeated.
`
`
`
`11
`
`AKER EXHIBIT 2001 PAGE 0011
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of US 10,010,567
`Ex. 2001, Jaczynski Declaration
`
`
`
`Ex. 1038 at 0002. Thus, Bottino II performed a modified version of the TLC
`
`method of Freeman and West (Ex. 2002) and quantified the amounts of lipid
`
`classes separated on TLC plates by gravimetry, which is a weighing method.
`
`27. As noted by Dr. Tallon, the footnote for the “unknown fraction” reads as
`
`follows:
`
`§Rf between those of triglycerides and diglycerides. The recovered amount
`
`of this fraction was too small for further characterization.
`
`Ex. 1038 at 0003. Rf refers to the retardation factor, which in thin layer
`
`chromatography (TLC) is defined as the ratio of the distance traveled by the center
`
`of a spot to the distance traveled by the solvent front. For example, Rf is defined in
`
`the IUPAC Goldbook. Ex. 2003 is a screenshot of the definition from the online
`
`version of the IUPAC Goldbook as of July 20, 2021. In lay terms, the Rf value
`
`when used in relation to TLC is a measure of how far an analyte travels on a TLC
`
`plate. The direction of travel in TLC plates is generally from the bottom of the
`
`plate to the top. Different analytes such as triglycerides, diglycerides,
`
`phospholipids and free fatty acids will have different Rf values, indicating that they
`
`travel different distances on the TLC plate. A high Rf value indicates that the
`
`compound has travelled far up the plate and is less polar, while a lower Rf value
`
`indicates that the compound has not travelled far, and is more polar.
`
`
`
`12
`
`AKER EXHIBIT 2001 PAGE 0012
`
`

`

`
`
`28. The data in Bottino II do not support Dr. Tallon’s conclusion that the
`
`Inter Partes Review of US 10,010,567
`Ex. 2001, Jaczynski Declaration
`
`unknown fraction contained the free fatty acids and that the free fatty acid content
`
`of the Bottino II extract would thus be less than 2%. Specifically, Figure 1 of
`
`Freeman and West demonstrates that free fatty acids have an Rf value that is lower
`
`than that of diglycerides and triglycerides in the solvent systems utilized and
`
`therefore the free fatty acids do not travel as far as triglycerides or diglycerides in
`
`solvent system 1 (panel a of Fig. 1 or the combination of solvent systems 1 and 2
`
`(panel c in Fig. 1). Fig.1 is reproduced for reference:
`
`
`
`13
`
`AKER EXHIBIT 2001 PAGE 0013
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of US 10,010,567
`Ex. 2001, Jaczynski Declaration
`
`Ex. 2002 at 0002. As can be seen, in each solvent system utilized, free fatty acids
`
`(designated FA in Figure 1) migrate a shorter distance than triglycerides (TG in
`
`Figure 1) and diglycerides (DG in Figure 1), and farther than phospholipids (PL in
`
`Figure 1). The alterations of the Freeman and West solvent systems noted in
`
`Bottino II would not be expected to change this migration pattern. Thus, Bottino
`
`II’s “unknowns,” which migrated between the triglycerides and diglycerides, could
`
`not include free fatty acids as concluded by Dr. Tallon.
`
`
`
`14
`
`AKER EXHIBIT 2001 PAGE 0014
`
`

`

`
`
`29. As a result, Bottino II contains no information on the free fatty acid content
`
`Inter Partes Review of US 10,010,567
`Ex. 2001, Jaczynski Declaration
`
`of its extracts. Given the content of diglycerides, lysophosphatidylcholine, and
`
`phosphatidylglycerol reported in Table 2, it would be reasonable to assume that
`
`free fatty acids were present in the sample but not reported. Bottino II does not
`
`provide photographs of the TLC plates. One could speculate that the lack of data
`
`on free fatty acid content is due to poor resolution of spots representing lipids on
`
`the TLC plates, but without pictures of the TLC plates this cannot be determined.
`
`It is notable that when the Station 8 and Station 11 data for E. superba are
`
`compared, the values for PC and PE are missing from the Station 8 data. This
`
`indicates that the data is not reliable and would be disregarded by a POSITA even
`
`for anecdotal use. Bottino II was published in 1975. By 2006, it was unlikely that
`
`a paper with these types of problems with the data would be accepted for
`
`publication.
`
`30. Furthermore, some of the values reported in Table 2 have extremely high
`
`levels of standard deviation (SD). For example, the “unknowns” are reported as
`
`2% ± 22% and diglycerides as reported as 4% ± 5% for the Station 11 sample, and
`
`as 21 % and 17% in the Station 8 sample, respectively. Due to this high degree of
`
`variability, a POSITA would be discouraged from drawing any conclusions about
`
`the actual lipid contents of the extracts, much less the free fatty acid content. In
`
`
`
`15
`
`AKER EXHIBIT 2001 PAGE 0015
`
`

`

`
`
`fact, from my experience, which would be consistent with that of a POSITA,
`
`Inter Partes Review of US 10,010,567
`Ex. 2001, Jaczynski Declaration
`
`whenever I see such a high SD as 2 ± 22 (the SD is about 1000% greater than the
`
`actual value it represents), the datum cannot be considered as reliable, even
`
`anecdotally. To highlight the unreliability of the data, Station 8 shows again about
`
`1000% higher value (i.e., 21%) for the “Unknown” than Station 11 (i.e., 2%).
`
`31.
`
`In conclusion, the combination of Sampalis I, Bottino II and Randolph fails
`
`to provide the claim element of “less than 3% free fatty acids” in independent
`
`claims 1 and 15 and the claims dependent thereon.
`
`B. Grounds 2, 3 and 4 fail because the combined references do not teach
`
`each element of the claims
`
`32. Rimfrost relies on Bottino II to provide the free fatty acid limitation in
`
`Ground 2, 3 and 4 which are applied to claims that depend on independent claims 1
`
`and 15 addressed in Ground 1. The same analysis applies to these grounds as
`
`Bottino II and the references as cited against the claims do not teach the claim
`
`element of “less than 3% free fatty acids.”
`
`33.
`
`I further declare that all statements made herein of my own knowledge are
`
`true and that all statements made on information and belief are believed to be true;
`
`and further that these statements were made with the knowledge that willful false
`
`
`
`16
`
`AKER EXHIBIT 2001 PAGE 0016
`
`

`

`
`
`statements and the like so made are punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both,
`
`Inter Partes Review of US 10,010,567
`Ex. 2001, Jaczynski Declaration
`
`under section 1001 of title 18 of the United States Code, and that such willful false
`
`statements may jeopardize the validity of the application or any patent issued
`
`thereon.
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`August 4, 2021
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`________________________
`
`Dr. Jacek Jaczynski
`
`17
`
`AKER EXHIBIT 2001 PAGE 0017
`
`

`

`Inter Partes Review of US 10,010,567
`Ex. 2001, Jaczynski Declaration
`
`APPENDIX A
`
`
`
`18
`
`
`
`
`
`
`AKER EXHIBIT 2001 PAGE 0018
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Jacek Jaczynski
`West Virginia University; Davis College of Agriculture, Natural Resources, and Design
`Division of Animal & Nutritional Sciences; P.O. Box 6108, Morgantown, WV 26506-6108
`TEL: 304-293-1893; FAX: 304-293-2232; E-MAIL: Jacek.Jaczynski@mail.wvu.edu;
`
`
`Education:
`• Oregon State University, Food Science and Technology, Ph.D., 2002, dissertation: “Surimi seafood under
`thermal and e-beam processing”
`• Oregon State University, Food Science and Technology, M.S., 1998, thesis: “Antimicrobial activity of nisin
`and hen lysozyme acting in tandem against Listeria monocytogenes on a model surface”
`• Agricultural University of Poznan (Poland), Biotechnology, M.S., 1995, thesis: “Optimization of a high-cell
`density propionic acid fermentation in a continuous bio-reactor system with micro-carriers”
`
`
`Work and Teaching Experience:
`• Professor (teaching – 50%, research – 50%), West Virginia University, 2013 to present
`• Associate Professor (teaching – 50%, research – 50%), West Virginia University, 2008-2013
`• Assistant Professor (teaching – 50%, research – 50%), West Virginia University, 2002-2008
`• Graduate Research Assistant, Oregon State University Seafood Laboratory, 1998-2002
`• Graduate Research Assistant, Oregon State University, 1996-1998
`
`
`Annual Teaching:
`• HN&F 126 – Society and Food (HN&F – Human Nutrition and Food), 3 CR, fall and spring semesters,
`annual enrollment ~300, approved for General Education Foundation (GEF).
`• HN&F 126 online – Society and Food, 3 CR, summer semester available through WVU Ecampus, enrollment
`~50, approved for GEF.
`• FDST 200 – Food Science and Technology, 3 CR, fall semesters, enrollment ~100, approved for GEF.
`• FDST 200 online – Food Science and Technology, 3 CR, summer semester available through WVU Ecampus,
`enrollment ~50, approved for GEF..
`• FDST 445/545 – Food Microbiology, 3 CR, spring semesters, enrollment ~30.
`
`
`Professional Affiliations:
`• Institute of Food Technologists
`• American Chemical Society
`• World Aquaculture Society
`• Gamma Sigma Delta
`
`
`Patents and Trademarks (* – denotes primary inventor):
`• Jaczynski* J. 2010. Continuous protein and lipid recovery from food animal processing byproducts. U.S.
`Patent and Trademark Office. Patent number 7,763,717.
`• Matak KE, Jaczynski* J. 2012. YumEGGa™ - ready-to-eat egg stick snack with nutraceutical properties.
`Patent and Trademark Office. Trademark number 4,169,256.
`
`
`
`
`Book Chapters (* – denotes corresponding author):
`2004
`• Jaczynski* J, Park JW. 2004. Temperature, Color and Texture Prediction Models for Surimi Seafood
`Pasteurization. In: Shahidi F, Spanier A, Ho CT, Braggins T, editors. Quality of Fresh and Processed Foods.
`New York: Kluwer Academics/Plenum Publishing. p 121-34.
`• Jaczynski* J, Park JW. 2004. Application of Electron Beam to Surimi Seafood. In: Komolprasert V,
`
`
`
`
`AKER EXHIBIT 2001 PAGE 0019
`
`

`

`Morehouse K, editors. Irradiation of Food and Packaging: Recent Developments. Washington, DC:
`American Chemical Society. p 165-79.
`2005
`• Su* YC, Daeschel MA, Frazier J, Jaczynski J. 2005. Microbiology and Pasteurization of Surimi Seafood. In:
`Park JW, editor. Surimi and Surimi Seafood, 2nd ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press. p 583-648.
`• Jaczynski* J, Hunt A, Park JW. 2005. Safety and Quality of Frozen Fish, Shellfish and Related Products. In:
`Sun DW, editor. Handbook of Frozen Food Processing and Packaging. Boca Raton: CRC Press. p 341-377.
`2007
`• Torres* JA, Chen YC, Rodrigo-García J, Jaczynski J. 2007. Recovery of By-products from Seafood
`Processing Streams. In: Shahidi F, editor. Maximizing the Value of Marine By-products. Boca Raton: CRC
`Press. p 65-90.
`2008
`• Jaczynski* J. 2008. Protein and Lipid Recovery from Food Processing By-products Using Isoelectric
`Solubilization/Precipitation. In: Papadopoulos KN, editor. Food Chemistry Research Developments.
`Hauppauge: Nova Science Publishers. p 167-198.
`2009
`• Jaczynski* J. 2009. Application of Electron Beam to Food Processing with Emphasis on Seafood Products:
`Inactivation of Food-borne Pathogens and Effects on Food Quality. In: Bellinghouse VC, editor. Food
`Processing: Methods, Techniques, and Trends. Hauppauge: Nova Science Publishers. p 211-247.
`• Jaczynski* J, Chen YC, Velazquez G, Torres JA. 2009. Procesamiento con haz de Electrones. In: Legarreta
`IG, Rosmini MA, Armenta R, editors. Tecnologia de Productos de Origen Acuatico Pescado. Mexico City:
`Editorial Limusa, S.A. de C.V. p 405-426.
`• Jaczynski* J, Chen YC, Velazquez G, Torres JA. 2009. Recuperacion de Protein as y Lipidos. In: Legarreta
`IG, Rosmini MA, Armenta R, editors. Tecnologia de Productos de Origen Acuatico Pescado. Mexico City:
`Editorial Limusa, S.A. de C.V. p 461-474.
`• Matak KE, Jaczynski* J. 2009. Food Preservation with Electron Beam. In: Hulsen I, Ohnesorge E, editors.
`Food Science Research and Technology. Hauppauge: Nova Science Publishers. p 229-246.
`2010
`• Rodrigo-García J, Jaczynski J, Torres* JA. 2010. Recovery and Utilization of Proteins from Surimi
`Processing Water. In: Bechtel PJ, Smiley S, editors. A Sustainable Future: Fish Processing Byproducts.
`Fairbanks: Alaska Sea Grant, University of Alaska. p 147-160.
`• Gehring CK, Gigliotti JC, Tou JC, Moritz JS, Jaczynski* J. 2010. The Biochemistry of Isoelectric Processing
`and Nutritional Quality of Proteins and Lipids Recovered with This Technique. In: Haugen S, Meijer S,
`editors. Handbook of Nutritional Biochemistry: Genomics, Metabolomics and Food Supply. Hauppauge:
`Nova Science Publishers. p 255-288.
`2011
`• Tahergorabi R, Hosseini SV, Jaczynski* J. 2011. Seafood Proteins. In: Phillips GO, Williams PA, editors.
`Handbook of Food Proteins. Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing Ltd. p 116-149.
`2012
`• Jaczynski* J, Tahergorabi R, Hunt A, Park JW. 2012. Safety and Quality of Frozen Aquatic Food Products.
`In: Sun DW, editor. Handbook of Frozen Food Processing and Packaging, 2nd ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press. p
`343-385.
`2013
`• Su* YC, Daeschel MA, Frazier J, Jaczynski J. 2013. Microbiology and Pasteurization of Surimi Seafood. In:
`Park JW, editor. Surimi and Surimi Seafood, 3rd ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press. p 375-410.
`2014
`• Tahergorabi R, Jaczynski J, Matak* KE. 2014. Electron Beam Inactivation of Foodborne Pathogens with an
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`AKER EXHIBIT 2001 PAGE 0020
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Emphasis on Salmonella. In: Gomez-Lopez VM, Bhat R, editors. Practical Food Safety: Contemporary
`Issues and Future Directions. Heboken: Wiley Blackwell Publishing. p 451-471.
`• Tahergorabi R, Jaczynski* J. 2014. Isoelectric Solubilization/Precipitation as a Means to Recover Protein and
`Lipids from Seafood By-products. In: Kim SK, editor. Seafood Processing By-Products: Trends and
`Applications. New York: Springer Publishing Company. p 101-124.
`2015
`• Jaczynski* J, Tahergorabi R. 2015. Isoelectric Processing of Seafood Products: Amino Acid and Fatty Acid
`Profiles. In: Preedy VR, editor. Processing and Impact on Active Components in Food. New York: Elsevier
`Academic Press. p 417-427.
`2016
`• Tahergorabi R, Jaczynski* J. 2016. Seafood Proteins and Human Health. In: Raatz S, Bibus D, editors. Fish
`and Fish Oil in Health Promotion and Disease Prevention. New York: Elsevier Academic Press. p 323-331.
`• Tahergorabi R, Matak KE, Jaczynski* J. 2016. Inactivation Kinetics of Foodborne Pathogens with Electron
`Beam Emphasizing Salmonella. In: Jaiswal AK, editor. Food Processing Technologies: Impact on Product
`Attributes. Boca Raton: CRC Press. p 671-691.
`2017
`• Zhong T, Oporto* GS, Jaczynski J. 2017. Antimicrobial Food Packaging with Cellulose-Copper
`Nanoparticles Embedded in Thermoplastic Resin. In: Grumezescu A, editor. Food Preservation:
`Nanotechnology in the Agri-Food Industry. New York: Elsevier Academic Press. p 671-702.
`• Tahergorabi R, Jaczynski* J. 2017. Nutraceutical Egg Products. In: Hester P, editor. Egg Innovations and
`Strategies for Improvement. New York: Elsevier Academic Press. p 271-280.
`
`
`Peer-Reviewed Publications (* – denotes corresponding author and in some instances co-corresponding authors;
`impact factors and journal rankings based on 2018 Journal Citation Reports®):
`
`2002
`• Jaczynski J, Park* JW. 2002. Temperature prediction during thermal processing of surimi seafood. Journal of
`Food Science 67(8):3053-3057 (impact: 2.081, rank: 56/135).
`2003
`• Jaczynski J, Park* JW. 2003. Predictive models for microbial inactivation and texture degradation in surimi
`seafood during thermal processing. Journal of Food Science 68(3):1025-1030 (impact: 2.081, rank: 56/135).
`• Jaczynski J, Park* JW. 2003. Physicochemical properties of surimi seafood as affected by electron beam and
`heat. Journal of Food Science 68(5):1626-1630 (impact: 2.081, rank: 56/135).
`• Jaczynski J, Park* JW. 2003. Microbial inactivation and electron penetration in surimi seafood during
`electron beam processing. Journal of Food Science 68(5):1788-1792 (impact: 2.081, rank: 56/135).
`2004
`• Jaczynski J, Park* JW. 2004. Physicochemical changes in Alaska pollock surimi and surimi gel as affected by
`electron beam. Journal of Food Science 69(1):53-57 (impact: 2.081, rank: 56/135).
`2005
`• Moritz* JS, Parsons AS, Buchanan NP, Baker NJ, Jaczynski J, Gekara OJ, Bryan WB. 2005. Synthetic
`methionine and feed restriction effects on performance and meat quality of organically reared broiler
`chickens. Journal of Applied Poultry Research 14:521-535 (impact: 0.808, rank: 41/61).
`2006
`• Black JL, Jaczynski* J. 2006. Temperature effect on inactivation kinetics of Escherichia coli O157:H7 by
`electron beam in ground beef, chicken breast meat, and trout fillets. Journal of Food Science 71(6):M221-227
`(impact: 2.081, rank: 56/135).
`• Chen YC, Nguyen J, Semmens K, Beamer S, Jaczynski* J. 2006. Enhancement of omega-3 fatty acid content
`in rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) fillets. Journal of Food Science 71(7):C383-389 (impact: 2.081,
`
`
`
`
`AKER EXHIBIT 2001 PAGE 0021
`
`

`

`rank: 56/135).
`2007
`• Chen YC, Nguyen J, Semmens K, Beamer S, Jaczynski* J. 2007. Physicochemical changes in omega-3-
`enhanced farmed rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) muscle during refrigerated storage. Food Chemistry
`104(3):1143-1152 (impact: 5.399, rank: 7/135).
`• Chen YC, Jaczynski* J. 2007. Gelation of protein recovered from whole Antarctic krill (Euphausia superba)
`by isoelectric solubilization/precipitation as affected by functional additives. Journal of Agricultural and
`Food Chemistry 55(5):1814-1822 (impact: 3.571, rank: 28/135).
`• Tou* JC, Jaczynski J, Chen YC. 2007. Krill for human consumption: nutritional value and potential health
`benefits. Nutrition Reviews 65(2):63-77 (impact: 5.779, rank: 8/87).
`• Chen YC, Jaczynski* J. 2007. Protein recovery from rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) processing by-
`products via isoelectric solubilization/precipitation and its gelation properties as affected by functional
`additives. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 55(22):9079-9088 (impact: 3.571, rank: 28/135).
`• Chen YC, Tou JC, Jaczynski* J. 2007. Amino acid, fatty acid, and mineral profiles of materials recovered
`from rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) processing by-products using isoelectric
`solubilization/precipitation. Journal of Food Science 72(9):C527-535 (impact: 2.081, rank: 56/135).
`• Black JL, Jaczynski* J. 2007. Effect of ionic strength on inactivation kinetics of Escherichia coli O157:H7 by
`electron beam in ground beef, chicken breast meat, and trout fillets. International Journal of Food Science
`and Technology 42(7):894-902 (impact: 2.281, rank: 53/135).
`• Chalise PR, Hotta E, Matak KE, Jaczynski* J. 2007. Inactivation kinetics of Escherichia coli by pulsed
`electron beam. Journal of Food Science 72(7):M280-285 (impact: 2.081, rank: 56/135).
`2008
`• Black JL, Jaczynski* J. 2008. Effect of water activity on inactivation kinetics of Escherichi