Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/442,489

AMYLASE ENZYMES

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Sep 23, 2021
Examiner
BARRON, SEAN C
Art Unit
1653
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
BASF Corporation
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
53%
Grant Probability
Moderate
2-3
OA Rounds
3y 8m
To Grant
85%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 53% of resolved cases
53%
Career Allow Rate
323 granted / 605 resolved
-6.6% vs TC avg
Strong +32% interview lift
Without
With
+31.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 8m
Avg Prosecution
68 currently pending
Career history
673
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
6.2%
-33.8% vs TC avg
§103
43.6%
+3.6% vs TC avg
§102
16.0%
-24.0% vs TC avg
§112
22.4%
-17.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 605 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 Amendments Applicant's amendments filed 9/02/2025 to claims 1-3 have been entered. Claims 22 has been canceled. Claims 1-21 remain pending, of which claims 1-3 and 17-19 are being considered on their merits. Claims 4-17, 20, and 21 remain withdrawn from consideration. References not included with this Office action can be found in a prior action. The instant amendments to claim 1 have overcome the 35 U.S.C. § 102 rejections of record over Estell, which are withdrawn. Any other rejections of record not particularly addressed below are withdrawn in light of the claim amendments and/or applicant’s comments. Claim Objections Applicant is advised that should claim 2 be found allowable, claim 3 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof and vice versa. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m). In this case, both claims depend from claim 1 and so necessarily incorporate SEQ ID NO: 133 and are directed towards the same amino acid positions for at least two substitutions and the same generic substitutions. Election/Restriction Claim 19 was inadvertently omitted from the restriction requirement dated 9/06/2024, and for clarity of the record is grouped with Group I, presently claims 1-19. As such, this Office Action is non-final. Claims 4-16 remain withdrawn in view of the species election requirement dated 12/12/2024 and Applicant’s reply dated 2/15/2025. Claim Rejections - 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 factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claims 1-3 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Estell et al. (US 8,852,912) in view of Andersen et al. (US 2016/0201042; Reference A). Estell teaches and isolated alpha-amylase variant comprising SEQ ID NO: 2, and being 100% identical to instant SEQ ID NO: 133 and carrying a mutation at position 246 (Col. 4, lines 29-53; also Table 3.2 in Col. 75 for specific mutations at position 246 and being P246): US-13-260-146-2 Filing date in PALM: 2011-11-08 Sequence 2, US/13260146 Patent No. 8852912 GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: ESTELL, David A. APPLICANT: JONES, Brian E. APPLICANT: KOLKMAN, Marc APPLICANT: ADAMS , Christian D. APPLICANT: CONCAR, Edward M. TITLE OF INVENTION: COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS COMPRISING ALPHA-AMYLASE VARIANTS WITH TITLE OF INVENTION: ALTERED PROPERTIES FILE REFERENCE: 31384US-2A CURRENT APPLICATION NUMBER: US/13/260,146 CURRENT FILING DATE: 2011-09-23 PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PCT/US10/29659 PRIOR FILING DATE: 2010-04-01 PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: US 61/165,813 PRIOR FILING DATE: 2009-04-01 NUMBER OF SEQ ID NOS: 70 SEQ ID NO 2 LENGTH: 484 TYPE: PRT ORGANISM: Bacillus sp. ALIGNMENT: Query Match 100.0%; Score 2666; Length 484; Best Local Similarity 100.0%; Matches 484; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0; Qy 1 NTAPINETMMQYFEWDLPNDGTLWTKVKNEAANLSSLGITALWLPPAYKGTSQSDVGYGV 60 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Db 1 NTAPINETMMQYFEWDLPNDGTLWTKVKNEAANLSSLGITALWLPPAYKGTSQSDVGYGV 60 Qy 61 YDLYDLGEFNQKGTIRTKYGTKTQYIQAIQAAKAAGMQVYADVVFNHKAGADGTEFVDAV 120 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Db 61 YDLYDLGEFNQKGTIRTKYGTKTQYIQAIQAAKAAGMQVYADVVFNHKAGADGTEFVDAV 120 Qy 121 EVDPSNRNQETSGTYQIQAWTKFDFPGRGNTYSSFKWRWYHFDGTDWDESRKLNRIYKFR 180 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Db 121 EVDPSNRNQETSGTYQIQAWTKFDFPGRGNTYSSFKWRWYHFDGTDWDESRKLNRIYKFR 180 Qy 181 STGKAWDWEVDTENGNYDYLMFADLDMDHPEVVTELKNWGTWYVNTTNIDGFRLDAVKHI 240 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Db 181 STGKAWDWEVDTENGNYDYLMFADLDMDHPEVVTELKNWGTWYVNTTNIDGFRLDAVKHI 240 Qy 241 KYSFFPDWLTYVRNQTGKNLFAVGEFWSYDVNKLHNYITKTNGSMSLFDAPLHNNFYTAS 300 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Db 241 KYSFFPDWLTYVRNQTGKNLFAVGEFWSYDVNKLHNYITKTNGSMSLFDAPLHNNFYTAS 300 Qy 301 KSSGYFDMRYLLNNTLMKDQPSLAVTLVDNHDTQPGQSLQSWVEPWFKPLAYAFILTRQE 360 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Db 301 KSSGYFDMRYLLNNTLMKDQPSLAVTLVDNHDTQPGQSLQSWVEPWFKPLAYAFILTRQE 360 Qy 361 GYPCVFYGDYYGIPKYNIPGLKSKIDPLLIARRDYAYGTQRDYIDHQDIIGWTREGIDTK 420 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Db 361 GYPCVFYGDYYGIPKYNIPGLKSKIDPLLIARRDYAYGTQRDYIDHQDIIGWTREGIDTK 420 Qy 421 PNSGLAALITDGPGGSKWMYVGKKHAGKVFYDLTGNRSDTVTINADGWGEFKVNGGSVSI 480 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Db 421 PNSGLAALITDGPGGSKWMYVGKKHAGKVFYDLTGNRSDTVTINADGWGEFKVNGGSVSI 480 Qy 481 WVAK 484 |||| Db 481 WVAK 484 , reading in-part claims 1-3. Estell teaches a value called Performance Index and being the ratio of any given mutant amylase performance to the base or non-mutant amylase (Example 7). Estell teaches an exemplary mutation of P246A, having improved detergent stability (2.26) (Example 7 at Table 7-1 and Col. 135; note that Example 7 refers back to Example 1 for the detergent stability assay at Col. 64, line 48 to Col. 65, line 26), reading in-part claims 1-3, 17, and 18. Estell teaches combining the amylase with one additional enzyme selected in-part form the group consisting of a protease, a lipase, a cellulase, and a pectinase (claim 19), reading on claim 19. Regarding claims 1-3 and 18, Estell does not teach the embodiment of the amylase of SEQ ID NO:133 having at least two mutations at positions 242, 245, and 246 Andersen teaches alpha-amylase variants (Abstract). Andersen teaches the alpha-amylase variants comprising an alteration at one or more positions corresponding to Y242 and F245 (¶0066), reading on claims 1-3 and 18. Andersen teaches the specific mutations of Y242F and F245I (¶0068), reading on claims 1-3 and 18. Andersen teaches that the alpha-amylase variants exhibit a high level of stability when incorporated into detergent compositions such as liquid detergents, in particular in the presence of chelating agents, surfactants, proteases and/or alkaline conditions (¶0011-0012), reading on claims 1-3 and 18. Regarding claims 1-3 and 18, It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was filed to add the Y242 and/or F245 mutants of Andersen to the P246 mutant alpha-amylase of Estell. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to do so because both Estell and Andersen are directed towards alpha-amylase variants and uses thereof. The skilled artisan would have been motivated to do so because Andersen teaches that that their alpha-amylase variants, such as Y242 and F245, exhibit a high level of stability when incorporated into detergent compositions such as liquid detergents, in particular in the presence of chelating agents, surfactants, proteases and/or alkaline conditions. Therefore the addition of Andersen’s mutations would likely and predictably improve upon the stability of the alpha amylase of Estell. Therefore, the invention as a whole would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the invention was filed. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments on pages 6-7 of the reply have been fully considered, but not found persuasive of error over the new grounds of rejection set forth above and necessitated by the instant claim amendments. Conclusion No claims are allowed. No claims are free of the art. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN C BARRON whose telephone number is (571)270-5111. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00am-3:30pm EDT/EST (M-F). 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, Sharmila Landau can be reached at 571-272-0614. 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. /Sean C. Barron/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1653
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 23, 2021
Application Filed
Mar 26, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Aug 28, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Sep 02, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 10, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12584906
COATING AGENT FOR INDUCING DIFFERENTIATION OF PLURIPOTENT STEM CELLS INTO BRAIN MICROVASCULAR ENDOTHELIUM-LIKE CELLS AND USE THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12558424
T CELLS HAVING ENHANCED ANTI-TUMOR ACTIVITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12550890
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MAINTAINING ORGAN VIABILITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12551511
METHODS TO DIFFERENTIATE STEM CELLS INTO HORMONE-PRODUCING CELLS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12544407
FIBROBLAST CELL THERAPY FOR TREATMENT OF OSTEOPOROSIS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
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

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
53%
Grant Probability
85%
With Interview (+31.6%)
3y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 605 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