DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Support for the amendments is within the instant application specification.
Applicant’s amendment to the claims filed on 2/23/2026 in response to the Non-Final Rejection mailed on 8/21/2025 is acknowledged. This listing of claims replaces all prior listings of claims in the application.
Claims 1, 4, 10-13, 15, 18-25 are pending.
Claim 15 is withdrawn from consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b).
Claims 2-3, 5-9, 14, 16-17 are cancelled.
Claims 1, 4, 10-13, 18-25 are pending and examined on the merits.
Applicant’s remarks filed on 2/23/2026 in response to the Non-Final Rejection mailed on 8/21/2025 have been fully considered and are deemed persuasive to overcome at least one of the rejections and/or objections as previously applied.
The text of those sections of Title 35 U.S. Code not included in the instant action can be found in the prior Office Action.
Withdrawn Rejections
The rejection of claims 13, 23-24 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph is withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment of claims 12, 23-24 to recite ‘a composition comprising either the first protease and not the second protease or the second protease and not the first protease.’
Maintained Claim Rejection - 35 USC § 103
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.
The rejection of claims 1, 4, 10-13, 18-25 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Basler et al (2011, Date Published 16 June 2011, WO 2011/072099 A2, 10.1186/s40643-014-0022-8, cited on PTO-892 mailed 9/25/2024) {herein Basler} in view of Toscano et al. (US 2017/0335307 A1, Date Published: Nov. 23, 2017, cited on PTO-892 mailed 9/25/2024) {herein Toscano} is maintained. The rejection has been modified in view of Applicant’s remarks dated 2/23/2026 that SEQ ID NO: 1 taught by Basler does not align with the instant application SEQ ID NO: 1.
Claims 1, 4, 10-13, 18-25 are drawn to a detergent composition comprising a first protease and a second protease, wherein the first protease has a net formal charge of -3, -4 or -5 relative to the protease of SEQ ID NO: 1, and the second protease has a net formal charge of -1, 0 or +1 relative to the protease of SEQ ID NO: 1; wherein the first protease is a variant of SEQ ID NO: 1 comprising a set of mutations selected from the group consisting of:* S99D+S101E+S103A+V104I+S156D+G160S+L262E;* K27H+S99D+S101E+S103A+V104I+S156D+G160S+Q245R+L262E;* S9R+S99D+S101E+S103A+V104I+S156D+G160S+K235M+Q245R+L262E;* S9R+S99D+S101E+S103A+V104I+S156D+G160S+L262E;* S9R+K27M+S99D+S101E+S103A+V104I+S156D+G160S+K237M+Q245R+L262E;* S9E+N43R+N76D+V205I+Q206L+Y209W+S259D+N261W+L262E;* S9E+N43R+N76D+N185E+S188E+Q191N+A194P+Q206L+Y209W+S259D+L262E;* *36D+N76D+H120D+G195E+K235L;* S9R+K27M+S99A+S101E+S103A+V104I+S156D+G160S+K237M+Q245R+L262E;* S9R+K27M+S101E+S103A+V104I+S156D+G160S+K237M+Q245R+L262E;* S9R+K27M+S99D+S101E+S103A+V104I+S156D+G160S+A215K+K237M+Q245R+L262E;* S9R+K27M+N43R+S99D+S101E+S103A+V104I+S156D+G160S+K237M+Q245R+L262E;* S9R+N43R+S99D+S101E+S103A+V104I+S156D+G160S+N173D+K235M+Q245R+L262E;* S9E+G97D+S156D+Y209W+A215K+L262E;* G97D+S101E+S156D+A172V+Y209W+A215K+L262E;* N76D+G97D+N140D+S 156D+Y209W+A215K+L262E;* N76D+G97D+S101E+T180A+Y209W+A215K+L262E;* N76D+G97D+S101E+Y209W+A215K+L262E;* N62D+G97D+S101E+Y209W+A215K+L262E;* N62D+G97D+S101E+V177I+Y209W+A215K+L262E;* N62D+N76D+G97D+Y209W+A215K+L262E;* K27M+G97D+S156D+Y209W+A215K+L262E;* K27M+N77D+G97D+S156D+Y209W+A215K+L262E;* K27M+N76D+G97D+Y209W+A215K+L262E;* K27M+N62D+G97D+Y209W+A215K+L262E;* S9E+G97D+S101E+Y209W+A215K+L262E;* S9E+N76D+G97D+Y209W+A215K+L262E+A270T; * S9E+N76D+G97D+Y209W+A215K+L262E; * S9E+N62D+G97D+Y209W+A215K+L262E; * S9E+K27M+G97D+Y209W+A215K+L262E; * S9E+N43R+N76D+N185E+S188E+Q191N+A194P+Q206L+Y209W+A215K+Q245R+S259D+L262 E;* S9E+N43R+N76D+S188E+Q191N+A194P+Q206L+Y209W+A215K+S259D+L262E;* S9E+N43R+N76D+N185E+S188E+Q191N+A194P+Q206L+Y209W+A215K+S259D+L262Q; and" S9E+N43R+N76D+N185E+S188E+Q191N+A194P+Q206L+Y209W+Q245R+S259D+L262Q; wherein the second protease is the protease of SEQ ID NO: 1 or a variant of SEQ ID NO: 1 comprising a set of mutations selected from the group consisting of:* K27M;* S99AD;* G97D+Y209W+A215K;* G97D+N117R+Y209W+A215K;* S9R+K27M+N43R+N76D+V205I+Q206L+Y209W+A215K+Q245R+S259D+N261W+L262E;* S9R+N43R+N76D+V205I+Q206L+Y209W+A215K+S259D+N261W+L262E;* S9R+N43R+N76D+V205I+Q206L+Y209W+S259D+N261W+L262E;* S9R+S99A+S101E+S103A+V104I+S156D+G160S+A215K+K235M+Q245R+L262E;* S9R+K27M+N43R+S99A+S101E+S103A+V104I+S156D+G160S+A215K+K237M+Q245R+ L262E;* S9R+K27M+N43R+S101E+S103A+V104I+S156D+G160S+A215K+K237M+Q245R+L262E;* Y167A+R170S+A194P;* S9R+A15T+V68A+N218D+Q245R;* S9R+A15T+G61E+V68A+A194P+V205I+Q245R+N261D;* S9R+A15T+V68A+S99G+Q245R+N261D;* S9R+A15T+V68A+H120D+P131S+Q137H+Q245R;* S9R+A15T+V68A+H120N+P131S+Q137H+Q245M;* S9R+A15T+G61E+V68A+A98S+S99G+N218D+Q245R;* S3T+V4I+S99D+S101R+S103A+V104I+G160S+V205I+L217D;* S3T+V4I+S99D+S101R+S103A+V104I+G160S+A194P+V205I+L217D;* G97D+Y209W+A215K+L262E; and* G97D+S156D+Y209W+A215K; wherein position numbers are based on the numbering of SEQ ID NO: 2.
With respect to claims 1, 18, Basler teaches SEQ ID NO: 2 which is Bacillus lentus subtilisin protease GG36 mature protein AZK12251, subtilisin protease (appendix A and page 24, lines 35-36). Said protease variant has a net charge of -1, 0, or -1 (page 92, lines 22-24).
With respect to claim 4, Basler teaches SEQ ID NO: 2 which is Bacillus lentus subtilisin protease GG36, subtilisin protease has a charge of -1 (page 76, lines 11-12). Examiner is interpreting said protease as a second protease. SEQ ID NO: 2 which is Bacillus amyloliquefaciens subtilisin protease BPN' mature protein AZK11498 has a total net charge of -2 (page 92, lines 23-24). Examiner is interpreting said protease as a first protease. Examiner is interpreting a net charge of -1 and -2 to differ by 1.
With respect to claims 10, 19-22, Basler teaches at an amino acid sequence (SEQ ID NO: 1) with 100% sequence identity to SEQ ID NO: 2 of the instant application (appendix A).
With respect to claim 11, Basler teaches the composition is a laundry detergent (page 93, lines 13).
With respect to claim 12, Basler teaches the composition is a laundry detergent wash liquor (page 93, line 13).
With respect to claim 13, Basler teaches SEQ ID NO: 2 (100% identical to the instant application SEQ ID NO: 1) (appendix A) has improved levels of cold water cleaning performance compared to other variants (page 93, line 35).
With respect to claims 23-24, Basler teaches SEQ ID NO: 2 (100% identical to the instant application SEQ ID NO: 1) (appendix A) with improved wash performance for stains resulting from milk/oil/pigment (page 19, lines 16-19). Evidentiary evidence of the instant application is cited to demonstrate that PC-10 stains are pigment, oil, milk (page 26, lines 5-6). As such, examiner is interpreting the stains taught by Basler to be PC-10 stains.
With respect to claim 25, Basler teaches an additional enzyme may be added to the dishwashing detergent (page 79, lines 26-31). Said enzymes are: lipase, cutinase, amylase, carbohydrase, cellulase, pectinase, mannanase, arabinase, galactanase, xylanase, oxidase (page 79, lines 30-31).
However, Basler does not teach the product of claim 1, wherein the first protease is a variant of SEQ ID NO: 1 comprising a set of mutations selected from the group consisting of:"S99D+S101E+S103A+V104I+S156D+G160S+L262E;"K27H+S99D+S101E+S103A+V104I+S156D+G160S+Q245R+L262E;"S9R+S99D+S101E+S103A+V104I+S156D+G160S+K235M+Q245R+L262E;"S9R+S99D+S101E+S103A+V104I+S156D+G160S+L262E;"S9R+K27M+S99D+S101E+S103A+V104I+S156D+G160S+K237M+Q245R+L262E;"S9E+N43R+N76D+V205I+Q206L+Y209W+S259D+N261W+L262E;"S9E+N43R+N76D+N185E+S188E+Q191N+A194P+Q206L+Y209W+S259D+L262E;"*36D+N76D+H120D+G195E+K235L;"S9R+K27M+S99A+S101E+S103A+V104I+S156D+G160S+K237M+0245R+L262E;"S9R+K27M+S101E+S103A+V104I+S156D+G160S+K237M+0245R+L262E;"S9R+K27M+S99D+S101E+S103A+V104I+S156D+G160S+A215K+K237M+Q245R+L262E;"S9R+K27M+N43R+S99D+S101E+S103A+V104I+S156D+G160S+K237M+Q245R+L262E;"S9R+N43R+S99D+S101E+S103A+V104I+S156D+G160S+N173D+K235M+Q245R+L262E;"S9E+G97D+S156D+Y209W+A215K+L262E;"G97D+S101E+S156D+A172V+Y209W+A215K+L262E;"N76D+G97D+N140D+S156D+Y209W+A215K+L262E;"N76D+G97D+S101E+T180A+Y209W+A215K+L262E;"N76D+G97D+S101E+Y209W+A215K+L262E;"N62D+G97D+S101E+Y209W+A215K+L262E;"N62D+G97D+S101E+V177I+Y209W+A215K+L262E;"N62D+N76D+G97D+Y209W+A215K+L262E;"K27M+G97D+S156D+Y209W+A215K+L262E;Attorn"K27M+N77D+G97D+S156D+Y209W+A215K+L262E;"K27M+N76D+G97D+Y209W+A215K+L262E;"K27M+N62D+G97D+Y209W+A215K+L262E;"S9E+G97D+S 10 1E+Y209W+A215K+L262E:"S9E+N76D+G97D+Y209W+A215K+L262E+A270T:"S9E+N76D+G97D+Y209W+A215K+L262E;"S9E+N62D+G97D+Y209W+A215K+L262E;"S9E+K27M+G97D+Y209W+A215K+L262E;"S9E+N43R+N76D+N185E+S188E+O191N+A194P+0206L+Y209W+A215K+Q245R+S259D+L262+1E+19NA19P06LY0WA1KS5DL2: "S9E+N43R+N76D+N5+S 1 88E+ O 19 1N+A1 94P+0206L+Y209W+A215K+S259D+L262 "S9E+N43R+N76D+N185E+S188E+O191N+A194P+Q206L+Y209W+A215R+S259D+L262Q (claim 1). The product of claim 10, wherein the first protease has an amino acid sequence that has at least 60% sequence identity to SEQ ID NO: 1 (claim 10). The product of claim 18, wherein the first protease has a net formal charge of -3 relative to the protease of SEQ ID NO: 1 (claim 18). The product of claim 19, wherein the first protease has an amino acid sequence that has at least 70% sequence identity to SEQ ID NO: 1 (claim 19). The product of claim 20, wherein the first protease has an amino acid sequence that has at least 80% sequence identity to SEQ ID NO: 1 (claim 20). The product of claim 21, wherein the first protease has an amino acid sequence that has at least 85% sequence identity to SEQ ID NO: 1 (claim 21). The product of claim 22, wherein the first protease has an amino acid sequence that has at least 90% sequence identity to SEQ ID NO: 1 (claim 22). The product of claim 24, wherein the composition has an improved wash performance on a set of standard stains comprising at least PC-03 compared to the same composition comprising either the first protease or the second protease (claim 24).
With respect to claim 1, Toscano teaches a subtilase variant mutant of S9E+N43R+N76D+N185E+S188E+Q191N+ Al94P+Q206L+ Y209W +S259D+L262E (para 0099 and 301). Said mutant is used in laundry detergents. Examiner is interpreting said subtilase variant mutant taught by Toscano to be a variant of SEQ ID NO: 1 of the instant application as it is a subtilisin protease derived from Bacillus lentus with 100% identity to SEQ ID NO: 1 of the instant application (appendix B and para 0052).
With respect to claim 10, Toscano teaches a first protease with at least 60% sequence identity to SEQ ID NO: 1 (appendix B). Examiner is interpreting the addition of 11 substitutions within the claimed first protease would result in a sequence identity of greater than 60%, as recited in the instant application claim 10.
With respect to claim 18, since the art teaches the structure of the first protease variant having improved wash performance (para 0023), it is the Examiner’s interpretation that the first protease variant containing S9E+N43R+N76D+N185E+S188E+Q191N+ Al94P+Q206L+ Y209W +S259D+L262E would necessarily have a net formal charge of -3 relative to the protease of SEQ ID NO: 1.
With respect to claims 19-22, Toscano teaches a first protease variant comprised of S9E+N43R+N76D+N5+S188E+ O191N+A 94P+0206L+Y209W+A215K+S259D+L262 mutations (para 301). Examiner is interpreting said subtilase variant mutant taught by Toscano to be a variant of the SEQ ID NO: 1 of the instant application as it is a subtilisin protease derived from Bacillus lentus (appendix B and para 0052). As such, since SEQ ID NO: 1 of the instant application is comprised of 269 amino acids and there are 12 point mutations claimed, it is the examiners position that said first protease variant would necessarily have at least 95.5% sequence homology to SEQ ID NO: 1 of the instant application.
With respect to claim 24, Toscano teaches a detergent with improved wash performance for PC-03 stains (table 4).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the teachings of Basler et al of SEQ ID NO: 2 which is Bacillus lentus subtilisin protease GG36 mature protein AZK12251, subtilisin protease (appendix A and page 24, lines 35-36) in a composition as a detergent or combine the teachings of Toscano because Toscano teaches a subtilase variant mutant of S9E+N43R+N76D+N185E+S188E+Q191N+ Al94P+Q206L+ Y209W +S259D+L262E (para 0099 and 301) as a composition of a detergent (abstract).
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to either use the teachings of Basler et al. by itself or combine the teachings of Toscano because Toscano provides the motivation to try combining the second protease taught by Basler of SEQ ID NO: 2 which is Bacillus lentus subtilisin protease GG36 mature protein AZK12251, subtilisin protease (appendix A and page 24, lines 35-36) and a subtilase variant mutant of S9E+N43R+N76D+N185E+S188E+Q191N+ Al94P+Q206L+ Y209W +S259D+L262E (para 0099 and 301) taught by Toscano because Basler teaches a composition that may comprise two or more additional enzymes selected from a protease (page 112, lines 1-6) of which Examiner is interpreting the protease variant taught by Toscano (first protease, appendix B) as an additional enzyme. Additionally, a person or ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to try utilizing said composition of the instant application SEQ ID NO: 1 taught by Basler (SEQ ID NO: 2) and a subtilase variant mutant S9E+N43R+N76D+N185E+S188E+Q191N+ Al94P+Q206L+ Y209W +S259D+L262E (para 0099 and 301) taught by Toscano because said Basler teaches the instant application SEQ ID NO: 1 (second protease) for cleaning (page 6, lines 22-25) and a subtilase variant mutant S9E+N43R+N76D+N185E+S188E+Q191N+ Al94P+Q206L+ Y209W +S259D+L262E (first protease). Especially since Baslar teaches the second protease is effective in cleaning (page 6, lines 22-25) and Tosacno teaches the variant provides improved activity, stability, and solubility in different detergents (Toscano: para 0005). As such, one of ordinary skill in the art would expect a composition comprised of both protease one and protease two, recited in the instant application, to result in a composition with improved cleaning ability. Additionally, the protease variant taught by Basler confers improved enzyme stability (page 82, cline 37) and may exhibit one of more of the following properties: enhanced or improved proteolytic activity, enhanced or improved stability, enhanced or improved ability to clean a surface or item, enhanced or improved cleaning performance, enhanced or improved fabric or laundry cleaning performance or wash performance, enhanced or improved hand wash performance, enhanced or improved hand or manual dishwashing performance, enhanced or improved automatic dishwashing performance, enhanced or improved laundry performance (page 18, lines 12-17). As such, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to try combining the protease variants as said properties would improve the ability of detergents to remove stains from clothes at various temperatures and pH ( Toscano: para 0006). Furthermore, MPEP 2144.06.I states “It is prima facie obvious to combine two compositions each of which is taught by the prior art to be useful for the same purpose (a first and second protease), in order to form a third composition to be used for the very same purpose.... [T]he idea of combining them flows logically from their having been individually taught in the prior art.” In re Kerkhoven, 626 F.2d 846, 850, 205 USPQ 1069, 1072 (CCPA 1980) (citations omitted) (Claims to a process of preparing a spray-dried detergent by mixing together two conventional spray-dried detergents were held to be prima facie obvious.). See also In re Crockett, 279 F.2d 274, 126 USPQ 186 (CCPA 1960) (Claims directed to a method and material for treating cast iron using a mixture comprising calcium carbide and magnesium oxide were held unpatentable over prior art disclosures that the aforementioned components individually promote the formation of a nodular structure in cast iron.); and Ex parte Quadranti, 25 USPQ2d 1071 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1992) (mixture of two known herbicides held prima facie obvious).”
One of skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success to make and use the claimed protease variant because Toscano provides the mutant variant and its uses and methods of making it. Basler provides the teachings of a subtilisin protease variant (SEQ ID NO: 2, same as the instant application SEQ ID NO: 1) (appendix A and page 24, lines 35-36), with a total net charge of -1, 0 or +1 (page 78, lines 11-12) the exhibits improved cleaning performance (page 19, lines 16-17). Therefore there would be a reasonable expectation of success that when the first protease taught by Toscano is combined with the second protease taught by Basler, a composition would be formed that exhibits improved wash performance as even said proteases alone exhibit improved wash function. As such, there would be a reasonable expectation of success to arrive at the above invention. Therefore, the above invention would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
RESPONSE TO REMARKS: Beginning on p. 2 of Applicant’s remarks, Applicant in summary contends that with respect to the statement by the examiner that “Basler teaches SEQ ID NO: 1 which is Bacillus lentus subtilisin protease GG36 mature protein AZK12251, subtilisin protease…,” for clarity, applicants note that SEQ ID NO: 1 of Basler is the DNA sequence encoding BPN’ (including the leader sequence and the prosequence) and SEQ ID NO: 2 of Basler is the protein sequence of BPN’, used for reference numbering in variants of Basler. SEQ ID NO: 1 of Basler does not align with the protein sequence of SEQ ID NO: 1 in the present application. Applicant contends that SEQ ID NO: 1 of Basler and SEQ ID NO: 1 of the present application are not identical. SEQ ID NO: 1 of Basler is the DNA sequence of BPN’. The corresponding mature protein sequence is presented in SEQ ID NO: 2 of Basler.
This argument is found to be not persuasive. Examiner appreciates Applicant’s comments. Examiner contends that the addition of the appropriate SEQ ID NO is notated within the maintained rejection above and within Appendix A, of which demonstrates the appropriate amino acid sequence. However, Examiner contends that based on Applicant’s own remarks of ‘SEQ ID NO: 1 of Basler is the DNA sequence encoding BPN’ (including the leader sequence and the pro-sequence) and SEQ ID NO: 2 of Basler is the protein sequence of BPN’ and ‘the corresponding mature protein sequence is presented in SEQ ID NO: 2 of Basler.’ Applicant acknowledges that SEQ ID NO: 2 is the same as the instant application SEQ ID NO: 1 (appendix A). Therefore, Examiner contends that the 103 rejection is appropriately maintained and no new art has been applied.
Applicant contends that one of skill in the art would not have interpreted a disclosure in the present application that SEQ ID NO: 1 has a net formal charge of -1, 0 or +1 as being applicable to the net formal charge of SEQ ID NO: 1 of Basler. Applicant contends that Examiner is interpreting said protease as a second protease.” Again, however, this misidentifies SEQ ID NO: 1 of Basler. SEQ ID NO: 1 of Basler is not the GG36 protease, but is the DNA sequence of BPN’. As such, the cited statement at page 76, lines 11-12 that provides “[a] variant according to the twenty-first aspect of the invention may have a total net charge of -1, 0, or +1 relative to the BPN’ wild-type” is not relevant as provided. A second protease of the present application has a charge relative to SEQ ID NO: 1 herein, which is a subtilisin protease. Applicant contends that as such, it is respectfully submitted that applicants’ descriptions of a total net charge of SEQ ID NO: 1 or a variant thereof cannot be interpreted as providing guidance or inherency to the total net charge of SEQ ID NO: 1 of Basler. As such, it is respectfully submitted that the arguments presented by the examiner fail to provide a prima facie case of obviousness based on the Basler reference.
This argument is found to be not persuasive. Examiner contends that Basler teaches SEQ ID NO: 2 which is Bacillus lentus subtilisin protease GG36 mature protein AZK12251, subtilisin protease (appendix A and page 24, lines 35-36) that has a net charge of -1, 0, or -1 (page 92, lines 22-24).
Furthermore, Examiner contends that Applicant has not disclosed any additional features beyond the amino acid sequences that would modify the protein in such a way wherein SEQ ID NO: 2 (Basler) would be structurally different from the instant application SEQ ID NO: 1 (100% identical to Basler SEQ ID NO: 2) to not have a net formal charge of -1, 0 or +1. Examiner welcomes Applicant to provide any such evidence of said structural differences that would result in the structure of the instant application SEQ ID NO: 1 being patentably different from SEQ ID NO: 2, taught by Basler.
Applicant contends that there is no description in Toscano regarding net charges and no disclosure that remedies the other failures of Basler with regard to a composition comprising two proteases with net charges, as presently claimed.
This argument is found to be not persuasive. Examiner contends that Applicant has not provided any additional guidance as to how the protein taught by Toscano is patentably different from the instant application first protease. Especially since Tosacano teaches the identical mutation of a subtilase variant mutant of S9E+N43R+N76D+N185E+S188E+Q191N+ Al94P+Q206L+ Y209W +S259D+L262E (para 0099 and 301). Additionally, Tosacano teaches said protease improves activity, stability, and solubility in different detergents (Toscano: para 0005). Of which is the objective of the instant application as well as the applied art.
Applicant contends that even if Toscano describes a protease such as the presently claimed first protease, the combination of Basler and Toscano fails to describe combination of two proteases in a composition as presently claimed.
This argument is found to be not persuasive. Examiner contends that Basler teaches the instant application SEQ ID NO: 1 may be used in combination with another enzyme (page 4, lines 10-11).
Applicant contends that Toscano and Basler both primarily address protease variants with improved stability. There is no guidance within these references to select two particular variants, both based on the same sequence (SEQ ID NO: 1 as recited in applicant’s specification) and combine them in the manner presently claimed. Applicants respectfully disagree that from the combination of these two references one of skill in the art would expect to obtain a detergent composition with improved wash performance.
This argument is found to be not persuasive. Examiner contends that Basler teaches the second protease is effective in cleaning (page 6, lines 22-25) and Toscano teaches the variant provides improved activity, stability, and solubility in different detergents (Toscano: para 0005). As such, one of ordinary skill in the art would expect a composition comprised of both protease one (taught by Toscano) and protease two (taught by Basler) to result in a composition with improved cleaning ability, of which is the focus of both references and the instant application (Basler, page 18, lines 10-18; Toscano, para 0006). Furthermore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in that art that combining the detergent taught by Basler with the one taught by Toscano would improve cleaning by leveraging synergy, where the enzymes work together to target a wider range of stains more effectively than a single enzyme alone. This approach also balances chemical properties to enhance cleaning in hard water or to boost performance on heavily soiled, multi-stain loads.
Conclusion
Status of Claims
Claims 1, 4, 10-13, 18-25 are pending.
Claim 15 is withdrawn from consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b).
Claims 2-3, 5-9, 14, 16-17 are cancelled.
Claims 1, 4, 10-13, 18-25 are rejected.
No claims are in condition for allowance.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ERICA NICOLE JONES-FOSTER whose telephone number is (571)270-0360. The examiner can normally be reached mf 7:30a - 4:30p.
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, Manjunath Rao can be reached at 571-272-0939. 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.
/ERICA NICOLE JONES-FOSTER/Examiner, Art Unit 1656
/MANJUNATH N RAO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1656
Appendix A
SEQ ID NO: 2 of Basler et al. 2010 aligned with SEQ ID NO: 1 of the instant application
Examiner interpreted second protease
Query Match 100.0%; Score 1361; Length 380;
Best Local Similarity 100.0%;
Matches 269; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 AQSVPWGISRVQAPAAHNRGLTGSGVKVAVLDTGISTHPDLNIRGGASFVPGEPSTQDGN 60
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 112 AQSVPWGISRVQAPAAHNRGLTGSGVKVAVLDTGISTHPDLNIRGGASFVPGEPSTQDGN 171
Qy 61 GHGTHVAGTIAALNNSIGVLGVAPSAELYAVKVLGASGSGSVSSIAQGLEWAGNNGMHVA 120
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 172 GHGTHVAGTIAALNNSIGVLGVAPSAELYAVKVLGASGSGSVSSIAQGLEWAGNNGMHVA 231
Qy 121 NLSLGSPSPSATLEQAVNSATSRGVLVVAASGNSGAGSISYPARYANAMAVGATDQNNNR 180
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 232 NLSLGSPSPSATLEQAVNSATSRGVLVVAASGNSGAGSISYPARYANAMAVGATDQNNNR 291
Qy 181 ASFSQYGAGLDIVAPGVNVQSTYPGSTYASLNGTSMATPHVAGAAALVKQKNPSWSNVQI 240
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 292 ASFSQYGAGLDIVAPGVNVQSTYPGSTYASLNGTSMATPHVAGAAALVKQKNPSWSNVQI 351
Qy 241 RNHLKNTATSLGSTNLYGSGLVNAEAATR 269
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 352 RNHLKNTATSLGSTNLYGSGLVNAEAATR 380
Appendix B
SEQ ID NO: 1 of Toscano et al. alignment with the instant application SEQ ID NO: 1
Examiner interpreted first protease
Query Match 100.0%; Score 1361; DB 1; Length 269;
Best Local Similarity 100.0%;
Matches 269; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 AQSVPWGISRVQAPAAHNRGLTGSGVKVAVLDTGISTHPDLNIRGGASFVPGEPSTQDGN 60
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1 AQSVPWGISRVQAPAAHNRGLTGSGVKVAVLDTGISTHPDLNIRGGASFVPGEPSTQDGN 60
Qy 61 GHGTHVAGTIAALNNSIGVLGVAPSAELYAVKVLGASGSGSVSSIAQGLEWAGNNGMHVA 120
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 61 GHGTHVAGTIAALNNSIGVLGVAPSAELYAVKVLGASGSGSVSSIAQGLEWAGNNGMHVA 120
Qy 121 NLSLGSPSPSATLEQAVNSATSRGVLVVAASGNSGAGSISYPARYANAMAVGATDQNNNR 180
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 121 NLSLGSPSPSATLEQAVNSATSRGVLVVAASGNSGAGSISYPARYANAMAVGATDQNNNR 180
Qy 181 ASFSQYGAGLDIVAPGVNVQSTYPGSTYASLNGTSMATPHVAGAAALVKQKNPSWSNVQI 240
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 181 ASFSQYGAGLDIVAPGVNVQSTYPGSTYASLNGTSMATPHVAGAAALVKQKNPSWSNVQI 240
Qy 241 RNHLKNTATSLGSTNLYGSGLVNAEAATR 269
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 241 RNHLKNTATSLGSTNLYGSGLVNAEAATR 269
