Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 16/903,770

Agricultural Composition for the Treatment and Prevention of Bacterial Diseases and Disorders

Final Rejection §103§112
Filed
Jun 17, 2020
Examiner
JOHNSON, DANIELLE D
Art Unit
1617
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Ciacamp Desenvolvimento E Inovação Tecnológica Ltda
OA Round
6 (Final)
44%
Grant Probability
Moderate
7-8
OA Rounds
4y 3m
To Grant
57%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 44% of resolved cases
44%
Career Allow Rate
314 granted / 710 resolved
-15.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+13.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 3m
Avg Prosecution
57 currently pending
Career history
767
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.9%
-38.1% vs TC avg
§103
55.3%
+15.3% vs TC avg
§102
10.7%
-29.3% vs TC avg
§112
22.1%
-17.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 710 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . Status of Claims Applicants’ amendment filed 7/11/2025 has been entered. Claims 1, 8, 9 and 11 were amended. Claims 1, 2, 4, 8, 9, 11 and 12 are pending. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 11 has recites “further comprising a bacteriophage targeting Candidatus Liberibacter asiatucus to enhance bacterial disruption” which is indefinite. The specification fails to identify a bacteriophage having this property and/or ability and therefore the metes and bounds of the term cannot be deciphered. For the purpose of search the term has been treated as encompassing any virus since bacteriophages are viruses. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 7/11/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant has failed to clarify the scope of the term bacteriophage targeting Candidatus Liberibacter asiatucus. Therefore, the rejection has been maintained. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 8, 9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sawant (US 2019/0029266; published January 31, 2019) in view of Alves De Souza (US 2014/0024857; published January 23, 2014). Applicant’s Invention Applicant claims an agricultural composition comprising N-acetyl-cysteine compounds selected from L-cysteine methyl ester hydrochloride, L-cysteine ethyl ester hydrochloride, N-acetylcysteine and S-carbometil cysteine (carbocisteine); and algae extract selected from Lithothamnium, Ulva, Laminaria, Fucus, Codium Palmaria, Gelidium, Chondrus and mixtures thereof: and an agriculturally acceptable carrier, wherein the algae extract enhances nutrient uptake and stabilizes the N-acetyl-cysteine compound, and the composition is optimized for application to citrus plants affected by Huanglongbing disease (HLB). Determination of the scope and the content of the prior art (MPEP 2141.01) With respect to claims 1, 2 and 9, Sawant teach algal granular compositions comprising at least one algal and at least one agrochemically acceptable carrier (abstract). The algae is selected from species including Palmaria, Chondrus, Ulva, Gelidium, Codium, Fucus, Laminaria and preferably, Lithothamnium [0027-0029]. The alga component is at 0.1-95% of the total composition [0030]. Excipients include preservatives selected from preservatives and sulfur containing antioxidants and thio compounds from cysteine and the N-acetyl, methyl or ethyl esters thereof [0066]. The preservative or antioxidant is present in an amount of 0.1-20% the total composition [0067]. With respect to claims 4, 8 and 11, the granular formulations further comprise fulvic acid, viruses, microbicides, micronutrients selected from zinc and manganese and macronutrients selected from potassium, calcium and nitrogen, in amounts ranging from 0.1-50% of the formulation [0070, 0071, 0074-76 and 0079-89]. With respect to claims 1 and 8, Sawant teach that the invention relates to use of the algal composition as a nutrient composition, a plant strengthener, a soil conditioner or a yield enhancer which improve plant health and exhibits enhanced stability under higher temperatures [0009-0111]. Therefore, Sawant inherently teach that the algae extract enhances nutrient uptake and stabilizes the N-acetyl-cysteine compound. The limitation that the composition is optimized for application to citrus is not given patentable weight since it is directed to intended use of the composition. Ascertainment of the difference between the prior art and the claims (MPEP 2141.02) Sawant teach excipients include sulfur containing antioxidants and thio compounds selected from cysteine and the N-acetyl, methyl or ethyl esters thereof [0066]. Sawant does not specify the N-acetyl cysteine compounds selected from NAC. It is for this reason that Alves De Souza is joined. Alves De Souza teaches methods of treating bacterial diseases from citrus variegated chlorosis, citrus canker and Huanglongbing disease with cysteine amino acid compounds to inhibit bacterial biofilm (abstract). The preferred cysteine amino acid compounds include L-cysteine ethyl ester hydrochloride, L-cysteine methyl ester hydrochloride, N-acetylcysteine and S-carbometil cysteine (carbocisteine) [0050-0066]. The cysteine amino acid, N-acetyl L-cysteine (NAC) is used to inhibit biofilms in plant of agricultural interest [0070]. Plants are treated with 120 mg, 600 mg and 1500 mg NAC with 250 mL nutrient solutions which correlate to formulations comprising up to 0.6% wt/vol. NAC [0119, Table 3]. The compounds may be bound to other compounds such as zinc and copper (claim 8). . Finding of prima facie obviousness Rationale and Motivation (MPEP 2142-2143) Sawant and Alves De Souza teach that N-acetyl cysteines are applied to improve plant health. Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill to combine the teachings of Sawant and Alves De Souza to combine an algae extract selected from Lithothamnium with an NAC and an agriculturally acceptable carrier with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated before the time of filing to combine the teachings of Sawant and Alves De Souza to combine NAC with Lithothamnium and a carrier in a single formulation because Sawant teach granular algal compositions comprising agriculturally acceptable carriers wherein N-acetyl cysteine can be selected as an antioxidant in the formulation. Furthermore, Alves De Souza teach that NAC is known to inhibit bacterial biofilm and treat citrus variegated chlorosis, citrus canker and Huanglongbing disease in plants. Therefore, one of ordinary skill would have been motivated to treat plants with a composition comprising algae extract and NAC to improve plant health with a reasonable expectation of success. Claim 12 is are rejected under 103(a) as being unpatentable Sawant (US 2019/0029266; published January 31, 2019) in view of Alves De Souza (US 2014/0024857; published January 23, 2014). Applicant’s Invention Applicant claims a method of treating Huanglongbing disease (HLB) comprising applying an agricultural composition comprising N-acetyl-cysteine compounds selected from L-cysteine methyl ester hydrochloride, L-cysteine ethyl ester hydrochloride, N-acetylcysteine and S-carbometil cysteine (carbocisteine) and algae extract selected from Lithothamnium, Ulva, Laminaria, Fucus, Codium Palmaria, Gelidium, Chondrus and mixtures thereof and an agriculturally acceptable carrier to a plant or plant part by foliar spray, drench or fertigation. Determination of the scope and the content of the prior art (MPEP 2141.01) Sawant teach algal granular compositions comprising at least one algal and at least one agrochemically acceptable carrier (abstract). The algae is selected from species including Palmaria, Chondrus, Ulva, Gelidium, Codium, Fucus, Laminaria and preferably, Lithothamnium [0027-0029]. The alga component is at 0.1-95% of the total composition [0030]. Excipients include preservatives selected from preservatives and sulfur containing antioxidants and thio compounds from cysteine and the N-acetyl, methyl or ethyl esters thereof [0066]. The preservative or antioxidant is present in an amount of 0.1-20% the total composition [0067]. With respect to claim 12, Sawant also teach methods of treating plants, seeds, crops and soil with the granular composition (abstract). The compositions are applied by drenching, irrigation and other methods [0110]. The compositions demonstrate improved crop yield [0153]. Ascertainment of the difference between the prior art and the claims (MPEP 2141.02) With respect to claim 12, Sawant does not teach a method of treating Huanglongbing disease, citrus canker or citrus variegated chlorosis or specify a compound is selected from NAC. It is for this reason that Alves De Souza is joined. Alves De Souza teaches methods of treating bacterial diseases from citrus variegated chlorosis, citrus canker and Huanglongbing disease with cysteine amino acid compounds to inhibit bacterial biofilm (abstract). The preferred cysteine amino acid compounds include L-cysteine ethyl ester hydrochloride, N-acetylcysteine and S-carbometil cysteine (carbocisteine) [0050-0066]. The cysteine amino acid, N-acetyl L-cysteine (NAC) is used to inhibit biofilms in plant of agricultural interest [0070]. Plants are treated with 120 mg, 600 mg and 1500 mg NAC with 250 mL nutrient solutions which correlate to formulations comprising up to 0.6% wt/vol. NAC [0119, Table 3]. The compounds may be bound to other compounds such as zinc and copper (claim 8). The treatment of citrus variegated chlorosis, citrus canker and Huanglongbing disease would inherently encompass disrupting bacterial colonies, reduce oxidative stress and capturing free radicals because Alves De Souza teach that citrus variegated chlorosis attacks the plant by bacterial action by forming biofilms [0009-0015]. Finding of prima facie obviousness Rationale and Motivation (MPEP 2142-2143) Sawant and Alves De Souza teach that N-acetyl cysteines are applied to improve plant health. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill to combine the teachings of Sawant and Alves De Souza and treat bacterial diseases selected from citrus variegated chlorosis, citrus canker and Huanglongbing disease by drenching plants with a composition comprising an algae extract selected from Lithothamnium, NAC and an agriculturally acceptable carrier with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated before the time of filing to combine the teachings of Sawant and Alves De Souza to combine NAC with Lithothamnium and a carrier in a single formulation because Sawant teach granular algal compositions comprising agriculturally acceptable carriers wherein N-acetyl cysteine can be selected as an antioxidant in the formulation. Furthermore, Alves De Souza teach that NAC is known to inhibit bacterial biofilm and treat citrus variegated chlorosis, citrus canker and Huanglongbing disease in plants. Therefore, one of ordinary skill would have been motivated to treat plants with a composition comprising algae extract and NAC to improve treat HLB and inherently disrupt bacterial colonies, reduce oxidative stress and capture free radicals with a reasonable expectation of success. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 7/11/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant first argues that the Examiner has failed to establish a prima facie case of obviousness because the present invention requires a synergistic combination of N-acetyl-cysteine compounds an algae extract and an agriculturally acceptable carrier. The Examiner is not persuaded by this argument. First, no claims are drawn to a synergistic combination. Claim 1 is drawn to a composition comprising the ingredients without specific concentrations being required. Claim 12 is drawn to methods of treating Huanglongbing disease by applying the composition to plants. Furthermore, Sawant teach granular compositions comprising 0.1-95% algae with 0.1-20% preservatives selected from thio compounds from cysteine and the N-acetyl, methyl or ethyl esters thereof [0066]. Alves De Souza teaches methods of treating Huanglongbing disease with cysteine amino acid compounds to inhibit bacterial biofilm wherein the cysteine amino acid, N-acetyl L-cysteine (NAC) is preferably used to inhibit biofilms in plants [0070]. Therefore, one of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine N-acetyl-cysteine compounds, an algae extract and an agriculturally acceptable carrier to treat Huanglongbin disease. Applicant next argues that unexpected results are obtained which show a significant reduction in bacterial colonies, however, Alves De Sousa teach that N-acetyl-cysteine compounds were already known to inhibit bacterial biofilm in plants. Therefore, the property is not unexpected. Alves De Souza teaches methods of treating bacterial diseases from citrus variegated chlorosis, citrus canker and Huanglongbing disease with cysteine amino acid compounds to inhibit bacterial biofilm (abstract). Therefore, Sawant and Alves De Souza teach compositions comprising algae extract and N-acetyl-cysteine (NAC) which are used to strengthen plant health and aid in disrupting bacteria on plants affected by HLB. Applicant argues Figure 1 demonstrates the reduction of Candidatus Liberibacter asiaticus (CLas) titers in plants treated with the NAC-formulation (T2) vs. untreated control groups. Again, Alves De Sousa teach that N-acetyl-cysteine compounds were already known to inhibit bacterial biofilm in plants. Therefore, the showing is not persuasive. Conclusion No claims allowed. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIELLE D JOHNSON whose telephone number is (571)270-3285. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 am-5:30 pm. 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, Bethany Barham can be reached on 571-272-6175. 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. /BETHANY P BARHAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1611 DANIELLE D. JOHNSON Examiner Art Unit 1617
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 17, 2020
Application Filed
Jul 28, 2022
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Feb 02, 2023
Response Filed
May 19, 2023
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Aug 25, 2023
Request for Continued Examination
Aug 29, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 02, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Apr 03, 2024
Response Filed
Jul 09, 2024
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Jan 14, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 16, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 07, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Jul 11, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 16, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599141
ROD-SHAPED PLANT VIRAL NANOPARTICLES OR VIRUS-LIKE PARTICLES FOR AGRICULTURAL APPLICATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595394
PLA / PHA BIODEGRADABLE COATINGS FOR SEEDS AND FERTILIZERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12582117
ENCAPSULATION OF LARVICIDES INTO BIOPOLYMER CAPSULES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577216
TRIAZINE BENZOATE COMPOUND AND APPLICATION THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12486216
PROCESSES FOR PREPARING NITROSYLATED PROPANEDIOLS, COMPOSITIONS COMPRISING THE SAME, AND MEDICAL USES THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 02, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

7-8
Expected OA Rounds
44%
Grant Probability
57%
With Interview (+13.0%)
4y 3m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 710 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month