Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/594,084

DUNALIELLA ALGA PREPARATION FOR PREVENTION AND/OR TREATMENT OF A NEURODEGENERATIVE DISEASE, A DISORDER ASSOCIATED WITH PROTEIN MISFOLDING AND COGNITIVE DECLINE

Final Rejection §102§112
Filed
Oct 01, 2021
Examiner
BOWERS, ERIN M
Art Unit
1653
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Nikken Sohonsha Corporation
OA Round
2 (Final)
55%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 8m
To Grant
66%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 55% of resolved cases
55%
Career Allow Rate
292 granted / 534 resolved
-5.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+11.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 8m
Avg Prosecution
47 currently pending
Career history
581
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
7.1%
-32.9% vs TC avg
§103
43.4%
+3.4% vs TC avg
§102
10.5%
-29.5% vs TC avg
§112
23.9%
-16.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 534 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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 . Claim Status The amendment of 09/30/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-9, 19-24, and 35 are currently pending in this US patent application and were examined on their merits. Withdrawn Rejections All rejections of the claims set forth in the previous Office action are withdrawn in light of the amendment of 09/30/2025, which significantly amended the composition administered in the method of claim 1. Claim Interpretation The instant claims recite a method of administering a “Dunaliella algae preparation” comprising 9-cis beta-carotene and all-trans beta-carotene to various patients. Claims 8 and 23 further limit the species from the Dunaliella genus from which the preparation is obtained. The instant specification states that a “Dunaliella algae preparation” may be prepared by any known method and may be prepared as an extract, which the specification states is “any substance…extracted from Dunaliella, using enzymes, organic solvents, or hydrophilic solvents for extraction…The extracts may be…further processed (extracted) by any extraction method” (specification, page 36). As such, the broadest reasonable interpretation of the “Dunaliella algae preparation” as recited in claim 1 as amended on 09/30/2025 in light of the specification is any composition comprising 9-cis beta-carotene and all-trans beta-carotene because the structures of these chemical compounds are not influenced by the source from which they are obtained, and so any composition comprising 9-cis beta-carotene and all-trans beta-carotene can be interpreted as a “Dunaliella algae preparation” comprising 9-cis beta-carotene and all-trans beta-carotene based on the information provided in the instant specification, regardless of whether the prior art states that the beta-carotene isomers have been obtained from Dunaliella. 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. Claims 1-9, 19-24, and 35 are newly rejected as necessitated by amendment 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. The terms “high” and “primarily” in claim 1 are relative terms that render the claim indefinite. The terms “high” and “primarily” are not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. How much beta-carotene must be present in a composition to qualify as a “high” level of beta-carotene, and how much of the composition must comprise the isomers 9-cis and all-trans for the beta-carotene to be “primarily” composed of these isomers? As such, one of ordinary skill in the art would be unable to determine the metes and bounds of the claimed invention, rendering it indefinite. Because claims 2-9, 19-24, and 35 depend from claim 1 but do not provide any further clarification of the indefinite language therein, these claims are also indefinite. Therefore, claims 1-9, 19-24, and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). In the interest of compact prosecution, the Examiner has interpreted the amounts of beta-carotene and of particular beta-carotene isomers in the composition administered to patients in the method of claim 1 to be any amount. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-9, 19-24, and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by El-Baz et al., Int. J. Pharm. Bio. Sci. 7(4): B324-B331 (2016; cited on the IDS filed 09/28/2022), as evidenced by El-Baz et al., Asian J. Pharm. Clin. Res. 10(1): 134-139 (2017; cited on the IDS filed 09/28/2022; hereafter ‘El-Baz 2017’). El-Baz teaches the oral administration of Dunaliella salina extract to Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) model rats (see entire document, including page B326, right column, paragraph 1; reads on claims 1-9, 19-24, and 35; see above under Claim Interpretation and under Claim Rejections – 35 USC 112 for the Examiner’s interpretation of the composition administered in the method of the instant claims; the Examiner further notes that claims 2-7, 19-22, and 35 recite only intended outcomes of performing the instantly claimed method, which do not receive patentable weight [see MPEP §§ 2111.02 and 2111.04]). The Dunaliella salina extract contains beta-carotene (page B329, left column, paragraph 1). El-Baz 2017 teaches that Dunaliella salina contains an abundance of beta-carotene, including the 9-cis isomer (see entire document, including page 134, left column, paragraph 2, to right column, paragraph 1). As such, the Dunaliella salina extract containing beta-carotene taught by El-Baz would inherently contain 9-cis beta-carotene, as evidenced by El-Baz 2017. Therefore, claims 1-9, 19-24, and 35 are anticipated by El-Baz, as evidenced by El-Baz 2017, and are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1). Response to Arguments Applicant has traversed the previous rejections of the claims under 35 U.S.C. §§ 112(a), 102(a)(1), and 103. However, these rejections have been withdrawn, as discussed above. As such, Applicant’s arguments are moot. Conclusion No claims are 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 Erin M. Bowers, whose telephone number is (571)272-2897. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7:30-5:00. 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. /Erin M. Bowers/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1653 01/26/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 01, 2021
Application Filed
Apr 01, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112
Sep 30, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 26, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601000
METHOD FOR THE HYDROXYLATION OF STEROIDS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12578331
MONOLAYER OF PBMCS OR BONE-MARROW CELLS AND USES THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12559735
DEVICE FOR DETECTING ORGANOPHOSPHATES
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12553027
GENERATION AND CRYOPRESERVATION OF PLURIPOTENT STEM CELL-DERIVED CLINICAL GRADE CORNEAL ENDOTHELIAL CELLS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12545944
METHOD OF DETECTION
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
55%
Grant Probability
66%
With Interview (+11.2%)
3y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 534 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