DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
Claims 21-32, 34, 35, and 37-40 are currently pending. Claims 37-40 remain pending. Claim 21 has been amended.
Examiner’s Note
It is noted that claims 37-40 are withdrawn. The Examiner suggests to cancel these claims.
It is noted that a phone call was made to Mr. Jerry Harris on Tuesday, September 8, 2026 to discuss the Examiner’s Amendments. However, no reply was received.
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 34 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 34 is dependent to claim 33, which has been cancelled. It is unclear which claim, claim 34 should be dependent to. Clarification is requested.
Reasons for Allowance
Claims 21-32 and 35 are allowed.
Claim 34 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The prior art of record fails to disclose, teach, or fairly suggest the method as claimed. The prior art that comes closest to teaching the limitations is Rae et al. ‘183 (US Pub No. 2017/0232183 – previously cited), which teaches a method comprising: obtaining whole blood from a subject; separating the whole blood into plasma, and at least one cellular blood fraction; contacting the plasma with a synthetic carbon particle (SCP), and forming treated plasma; forming reconstituted whole blood from the treated plasma and at least one cellular blood fraction; and administering the reconstituted whole blood to the subject. However, Rae et al. ‘183 fails to teach wherein the plasma comprises a first amount of unbound exosomes; forming a complex, wherein the treated plasma comprises a second amount of unbound exosomes, and the complex comprises an amount of SCP-bound-exosomes, wherein a plurality of SCP-bound-exosomes are adsorbed onto the SCP; and comparing the second amount of unbound exosomes with a first control and/or comparing the amount of SCP-bound-exosomes with a second control, which is remedied by Klass et al. ‘450 (US Pub No. 2011/0237450 – previously cited). Rae et al. ‘183, as modified by Klass et al. ‘450, fails to teach wherein a plurality of SCP-bound-exosomes are adsorbed onto the SCP via direct contact with the SCP. In addition, Applicant has argued in the Remarks filed 02 July 2026 that [0123] of Klass et al. ‘450 teaches binding agents that are not SCP. An updated search and consideration was performed and it was found that it would require an unreasonable combination of references that would not suffice for a realistic case of obviousness.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of 21-32, 34, and 35 have been withdrawn.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AURELIE H TU whose telephone number is (571)272-8465. The examiner can normally be reached [M-F] 7:30-3:30.
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, Alexander Valvis can be reached at (571) 272-4233. 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.
/AURELIE H TU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights