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 .
DETAILED ACTION
RESPONSE TO AMENDMENT
Status of Application/Amendments/claims
2. Applicant’s amendment filed February 11, 2026 is acknowledged. Claims 4-7, 9-12, 14-19, 21-33, 35 and 37-38 are canceled. Claims 1-3, 8, 13, 20, 34, 36 and 39 are amended. Claims 1-3, 8, 13, 20, 34, 36 and 39 are pending in this application. Election was treated as without traverse in the reply filed on May 27, 2025.
3. Claims 1-3, 8, 13, 20, 34, 36 and 39 are under examination with respect to amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), poly(GA), (GA)15 (SEQ ID NO:4), anti-poly(GA) antibody in this office action.
4. Applicant’s arguments filed on February 11, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not deemed to be persuasive for the reasons set forth below.
Claim Rejections/Objections Withdrawn
5. The objection to claims 1-3 and 35 is withdrawn in response to Applicant’s amendment to the claims and cancelation of claim 35.
The rejection of claims 5, 10 and 19 on the basis that it contains an improper Markush grouping of alternatives is moot because the claims are canceled.
The rejection of claim 35 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite is moot because the claim is canceled.
The rejection of claims 1-5, 7-8, 10, 13-14, 16, 19-20, 29-31, 34-36 and 39 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, lack of scope of enablement is withdrawn in response to Applicant’s amendment to the claims and cancelation of claims 4-5, 7, 10, 14, 16, 19, 29-31 and 35.
The rejection of claims 1-5, 7-8, 10, 13-14, 16, 19-20, 29-31, 34-36 and 39 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement is withdrawn in response to Applicant’s amendment to the claims and cancelation of claims 4-5, 7, 10, 14, 16, 19, 29-31 and 35.
The rejection of claims 4-5, 7, 10, 14, 16, 19, 29-31 and 35 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang et al. (US20210347866) is moot because the claims are canceled.
The rejection of claims 4-5, 7, 10, 14, 16, 19, 29-31 and 35 on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 48-50, 53-66 and 68-70 of copending Application No. 17/761764 (the ‘764 Application) is moot because the claims are canceled.
The rejection of claims 1-5, 7-8, 10, 13-14, 16, 19-20, 29-31, 34-36 and 39 on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-12 of US12360124 or claims 1, 5, 10 and 15 of US12392786 in view of Wang et al. (US20210347866) is withdrawn in response to Applicant’s amendment to the claims and cancelation of claims 4-5, 7, 10, 14, 16, 19, 29-31 and 35.
The provisional rejection of claims 4-5, 7, 10, 14, 16, 19, 29-31 and 35 on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-11, 13-15, 18-19 and 22 and 27-28 of copending Application No. 18/706038, claim 51 of copending Application No. 18/841754 in view of Wang et al. (US20210347866) is moot because the claims are canceled.
Claim Rejections/Objections Maintained
In view of the amendment filed on February 11, 2026, the following rejections are maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
6. 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 8, 13, 20, 34, 36 and 39 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang et al. (US20210347866). The rejection is maintained for the reasons of record and the reasons set forth below.
Claims 1-3, 8, 13, 20, 34, 36 and 39 as amended are drawn to a method for reducing aggregation of poly(GA) RAN proteins in a human subject in need thereof, the method comprising intramuscularly administering to the subject a therapeutically effective amount of a poly(GA) RAN protein vaccine encoding a DPR antigen comprising SEQ ID NO:4, wherein administration of the poly(GA) RAN protein vaccine to the subject elicits production of one or more anti-RAN protein antibodies in the subject and reduces aggregation of the poly(GA) RAN proteins in the CNS of the subject.
Response to Arguments
On p.10 of the response, Applicant argues that Wang does not disclose vaccines encoding a DPR antigen but describes administration of peptide vaccines.
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not found persuasive. Contrary to Applicant's arguments, the examiner asserts that based on MPEP §2131 , Wang et al. (US20210347866) does teach the claimed method because:
i. Wang does teach a poly(GA) RAN protein vaccine encoding a DPR antigen comprising SEQ ID NO:4 because the DPR peptide immunogen construct/vaccine disclosed by Wang has the formula of {(Th)m-(A) n-(DPR)-(A)n-(Th)m}y-X which comprises poly-GA constructs linked to a Th epitope which is immunogenic and is formulated into vaccines (see para.[0222]; [0226]-[0227]).
ii. Wang teaches a method for treating ALS including ALS with mutations in C9Orf72 gene in a human subject in need thereof as recited in claims 2-3 (see para. [0006]-[0007]), the method comprising intramuscularly administering (see para.[0112];[0203]) to the human subject a therapeutically effective amount of a Dipeptide Repeat (DPR) peptide immunogen construct or vaccine targeting portions of a Dipeptide Repeat (DPR) protein from C9orf72 (see para. [0222];[0226]-[0227], wherein the DPR peptide immunogen construct or vaccine has the formula of {(Th)m-(A) n-(DPR)-(A)n-(Th)m}y-X, wherein (DPR) is a B cell epitope having repeats of poly-GA, and wherein the DPR peptide immunogen construct/vaccine comprises the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NO:2, which is 100% identical to instant SEQ ID NO:4: (GA)25 (see para.[0028]-[0029]) which comprises 25 di-amino acid repeats and thus meets the limitations “comprises 2-150 di-amino acid repeats or optionally 10-25, 25-50 di-amino acid repeat” recited in claims 1 and 8 (see the sequence alignment; para. [0022]-[0035]; [0079]-[0116]; p. 14-27, tables 1-11; para. [0145]-[0197]). or mRNA vaccine in claim 39 (see para.[0134]-[0135]).
The DPR peptide immunogen construct/vaccine disclosed by Wang meet the limitation “a poly(GA) RAN protein vaccine to elicit production of anti-RAN protein antibodies in the CNS of the subject” recited in claim 1 because it contains {(Th)m-(A) n-(DPR)-(A)n-(Th)m}y-X, wherein Th is a heterologous T helper epitope, A is a heterologous spacer; (DPR) is a B cell epitope having repeats of poly-GA (elected); X is a-COOH or CONH2 of an amino acid; m is 0-4; n is 0-10; and y is 1-5 (see para. [0222]; [0226]-[0227]; para. [0002]-[0004]; [0007]-[0018]; [0022]-[0035]; [0038]-[0062]; [0068]-[0112];[0145]-[0197], [0198]-[0227]; Examples 1-3 , p. 14-27, tables 1-11, claims 1-24).
The DPR peptide immunogen construct/poly(GA) RAN protein vaccine disclosed by Wang further comprises one or more additional immunogens as in claim 13 (see para. [0222]; [0226]-[0227]; [0030]; [0065], Table 2; para. [0200]; [0205]); or further comprises one or more adjuvants as in claim 34 (see paragraphs [0033]; [0108]-[0110]) or in a composition comprising an exosome or a nanoparticle, optionally a lipid nanoparticle in claim 36 (see para. [0109]; [0111]-[0113]) Thus, claims 1-3, 8, 13, 20, 34, 36 and 39 are anticipated by Wang et al. (US20210347866).
Accordingly, the rejection of claims 1-3, 8, 13, 20, 34, 36 and 39 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang et al. (US20210347866) is maintained.
Double Patenting
7. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-3, 8, 13, 20, 34, 36 and 39 stand rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12436154 (original Application No. 17/761764) in view of Wang (US20210347866). The reference of Wang (US20210347866) is necessitated by Applicant’s amendment to the claims. The rejection is maintained for the reasons of record and the reasons set forth below.
Response to Arguments
On p.11 of the response, Applicant argues that None of the cited references discloses or suggests vaccines encoding a DPR antigen comprising SEQ ID NO:4 Wang does not disclose vaccines encoding a DPR antigen but describes administration of peptide vaccines.
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not found persuasive. Contrary to Applicant's arguments, the examiner asserts that based on MPEP§ 804; §2141, MPEP2141-I, rationales identified by the Court in KSR (KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007)), MPEP2141-II, the basic factual inquires of Graham v. John Deere Co.(Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966)),and MPEP §2141.01-2147.03, the cited references do render the claimed invention obvious because:
i. The claims 1-20 of US12436154 (the ‘154 patent) claim a method for detecting and identifying a subject as having a decreased level of anti-RAN protein antibodies after administration of a therapeutic agent compared to prior to administration of the therapeutic agent, and administering to the subject a vaccine against a RAN protein-associated disease or disorder, wherein the vaccine elicits an immune response including production of anti-poly(GA) antibody against a RAN protein-associated disease or disorder associated with poly(GA), and wherein the vaccine includes poly(GA)x, x=10,15,20..40 or GA10 (SEQ ID NO:4), GA15(SEQ ID NO:4) (claims 9-10) as recited in instant claims 1 and 8 and wherein the RAN protein-associated disease or disorder associated with poly(GA) includes ALS recited in instant claims 1-2 (claim 6).
While the claims of the ‘154 patent does not recite “intramuscular administration route” or additional immunogens as in claim 13, one or more adjuvants as in claim 34, in a composition comprising an exosome or a nanoparticle, optionally a lipid nanoparticle in claim 36 or mRNA vaccine, Wang teaches these limitations for the reasons set forth above under the 102 rejection. Thus, Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select and apply the known intramuscular administration route, the known additional immunogens, the known one or more adjuvants, the known exosome or nanoparticle, or lipid nanoparticle in a composition, the known mRNA vaccine and the known technique disclosed by Wang to the method of the ‘154 patent, and yield the predictable result of reducing aggregation of poly(GA)-RAN protein in a human subject in need thereof including the subject with ALS or ALS caused by one or more mutations in a C9Orf72 gene because the intramuscular administration route, the additional immunogens, the one or more adjuvants, the exosome or nanoparticle, or lipid nanoparticle in a composition and the mRNA vaccine are well-known in the art and are routine practices in the field as disclosed by Wang.
Accordingly, the rejection of claims 1-3, 8, 13, 20, 34, 36 and 39 on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12436154 in view of Wang (US20210347866) is maintained.
Double Patenting
8. Claims 1-3, 8, 13, 20, 34, 36 and 39 stand provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-11, 13-15, 18-19 and 22 and 27-28 of copending Application No. 18/706038, claim 51 of copending Application No. 18/841754 in view of Wang (US20210347866). The rejection is maintained for the reasons of record and the reasons set forth below.
Response to Arguments
On p.11 of the response, Applicant argues that None of the cited references discloses or suggests vaccines encoding a DPR antigen comprising SEQ ID NO:4 Wang does not disclose vaccines encoding a DPR antigen but describes administration of peptide vaccines.
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not found persuasive. Contrary to Applicant's arguments, the examiner asserts that based on MPEP§ 804; §2141, MPEP2141-I, rationales identified by the Court in KSR (KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007)), MPEP2141-II, the basic factual inquires of Graham v. John Deere Co.(Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966)),and MPEP §2141.01-2147.03, the cited references do render the claimed invention obvious because:
i. The claims 1-6, 11, 13, and 27-28 of Application No. 18/706038 (the ‘038 Application) claim a method for treating a subject having or suspected of having Alzheimer’s disease (AD) comprising administering to the subject one or more agents that reduced poly(GA) RAN protein translation, expression, aggregation or accumulation, wherein the agents including an anti-RAN protein antibody or a peptide or an inhibitory nucleic acid.
The claim 51 of Application No. 18/841754 (the ‘754 Application) claim a method for treatment of C9orf72 negative sporadic amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (C9-sALS) comprising administering a therapeutic agent including a interfering nucleic acid, a protein or an antibody that reduces expression of poly(GA) RAN protein.
While the claims of the ‘038 Application and the ‘754 Application do not recite a poly(GA) protein vaccine encoding a DPR antigen comprising SEQ ID NO:4 as in claim 1 or 8, “intramuscular administration route” or additional immunogens as in claim 13, one or more adjuvants as in claim 34, in a composition comprising an exosome or a nanoparticle, optionally a lipid nanoparticle in claim 36 or mRNA vaccine, Wang teaches these limitations for the reasons set forth above under the 102 rejection. Thus, Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select and apply the known poly(GA) protein vaccine encoding a DPR antigen comprising SEQ ID NO:4, the known intramuscular administration route, the known additional immunogens, the known one or more adjuvants, the known exosome or nanoparticle, or lipid nanoparticle in a composition, the known mRNA vaccine and the known technique disclosed by Wang to the method of the ‘038 Application and the ‘754 Application, and yield the predictable result of reducing aggregation of poly(GA)-RAN protein in a human subject in need thereof including the subject with ALS or ALS caused by one or more mutations in a C9Orf72 gene because the poly(GA) protein vaccine encoding a DPR antigen comprising SEQ ID NO:4 has been disclosed by Wang for treating ALS including C9orf72-mediated ALS, and the intramuscular administration route, the additional immunogens, the one or more adjuvants, the exosome or nanoparticle, or lipid nanoparticle in a composition and the mRNA vaccine are well-known in the art and are routine practices in the field as disclosed by Wang.
Accordingly, the provisional rejection of claims 1-3, 8, 13, 20, 34, 36 and 39 on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-11, 13-15, 18-19 and 22 and 27-28 of copending Application No. 18/706038, claim 51 of copending Application No. 18/841754 in view of Wang (US20210347866) is maintained.
Conclusion
9. NO CLAIM IS ALLOWED.
10. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Wang et al. (US20210347866) under the 102 rejection teach a method of treating ALS using a DPR peptide immunogen construct/vaccine comprises a DPR comprising the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NO:2, which is 100% identical to instant SEQ ID NO:4: (GA)25 (see para.[0028]-[0029]) which comprises 25 di-amino acid repeats.
SEQ ID NO:4
Sequence 2, US/17282336
Publication No. US20210347866A1
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: UNITED NEUROSCIENCE
APPLICANT: UNS IP HOLDINGS, LLC
APPLICANT: Wang, Chang Yi
APPLICANT: Verma, Ajay
TITLE OF INVENTION: PEPTIDE IMMUNOGEN CONSTRUCTS DIRECTED AGAINST DIPEPTIDE REPEAT
TITLE OF INVENTION: PROTEINS FROM C9ORF72
FILE REFERENCE: 1008578.103US9 (UNS-1003-US)
CURRENT APPLICATION NUMBER: US/17/282,336
CURRENT FILING DATE: 2021-04-01
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: US 62/739,794
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2018-10-01
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PCT/US2019/053967
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2019-10-01
NUMBER OF SEQ ID NOS: 232
SEQ ID NO 2
LENGTH: 30
TYPE: PRT
ORGANISM: Rattus norvegicus
FEATURE:
NAME/KEY: PEPTIDE
LOCATION: (1)..(30)
OTHER INFORMATION: (GA)15
Query Match 100.0%; Score 150; Length 30;
Best Local Similarity 100.0%;
Matches 30; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 GAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGA 30
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1 GAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGA 30
US-17-282-336-3
Sequence 3, US/17282336
Publication No. US20210347866A1
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: UNITED NEUROSCIENCE
APPLICANT: UNS IP HOLDINGS, LLC
APPLICANT: Wang, Chang Yi
APPLICANT: Verma, Ajay
TITLE OF INVENTION: PEPTIDE IMMUNOGEN CONSTRUCTS DIRECTED AGAINST DIPEPTIDE REPEAT
TITLE OF INVENTION: PROTEINS FROM C9ORF72
FILE REFERENCE: 1008578.103US9 (UNS-1003-US)
CURRENT APPLICATION NUMBER: US/17/282,336
CURRENT FILING DATE: 2021-04-01
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: US 62/739,794
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2018-10-01
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PCT/US2019/053967
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2019-10-01
NUMBER OF SEQ ID NOS: 232
SEQ ID NO 3
LENGTH: 70
TYPE: PRT
ORGANISM: Homo sapiens
FEATURE:
NAME/KEY: PEPTIDE
LOCATION: (1)..(50)
OTHER INFORMATION: (GA)25
Query Match 100.0%; Score 150; Length 70;
Best Local Similarity 100.0%;
Matches 30; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 GAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGA 30
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1 GAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGA 30
US-17-282-336-69
(NOTE: this sequence has 1 duplicate in the database searched)
Sequence 69, US/17282336
Publication No. US20210347866A1
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: UNITED NEUROSCIENCE
APPLICANT: UNS IP HOLDINGS, LLC
APPLICANT: Wang, Chang Yi
APPLICANT: Verma, Ajay
TITLE OF INVENTION: PEPTIDE IMMUNOGEN CONSTRUCTS DIRECTED AGAINST DIPEPTIDE REPEAT
TITLE OF INVENTION: PROTEINS FROM C9ORF72
FILE REFERENCE: 1008578.103US9 (UNS-1003-US)
CURRENT APPLICATION NUMBER: US/17/282,336
CURRENT FILING DATE: 2021-04-01
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: US 62/739,794
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2018-10-01
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PCT/US2019/053967
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2019-10-01
NUMBER OF SEQ ID NOS: 232
SEQ ID NO 69
LENGTH: 53
TYPE: PRT
ORGANISM: Artificial Sequence
FEATURE:
OTHER INFORMATION: Synthetic Peptide
FEATURE:
NAME/KEY: PEPTIDE
LOCATION: (1)..(30)
OTHER INFORMATION: (GA)15
FEATURE:
NAME/KEY: PEPTIDE
LOCATION: (31)..(34)
OTHER INFORMATION: KKK-epsilon K as a spacer
FEATURE:
NAME/KEY: SITE
LOCATION: (34)..(34)
OTHER INFORMATION: epsilon K
FEATURE:
NAME/KEY: PEPTIDE
LOCATION: (35)..(53)
OTHER INFORMATION: MvF5 Th (UBITh1)
Query Match 100.0%; Score 150; Length 53;
Best Local Similarity 100.0%;
Matches 30; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 GAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGA 30
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1 GAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGA 30
US20120142027 teaches a composition comprising a polypeptide comprising SEQ ID NO:17, which is 100% identical to instant SEQ ID NO:4 (see the sequence alignment below).
SEQ ID NO:4
Sequence 17, US/12528213
Publication No. US20120142027A1
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: WHITEHEAD INSTITUTE FOR BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH
TITLE OF INVENTION: COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR MODULATING THE IMMUNE RESPONSE AND
TITLE OF INVENTION: IDENTIFYING IMMUNOMODULATORS
FILE REFERENCE: WHI-006PC
CURRENT APPLICATION NUMBER: US/12/528,213
CURRENT FILING DATE: 0001-01-01
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PCTUS0854809
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2008-05-05
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: 60/902,983
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2007-02-23
NUMBER OF SEQ ID NOS: 136
SEQ ID NO 17
LENGTH: 30
TYPE: PRT
ORGANISM: Artificial Sequence
FEATURE:
OTHER INFORMATION: Description of Artificial Sequence: Synthetic
peptide
FEATURE:
NAME/KEY: MOD_RES
LOCATION: (3)..(30)
OTHER INFORMATION: May or may not be present
Query Match 100.0%; Score 150; Length 30;
Best Local Similarity 100.0%;
Matches 30; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 GAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGA 30
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1 GAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGA 30
US20220153874 teaches a composition comprising a polypeptide comprising SEQ ID NO:66, which is 100% identical to instant SEQ ID NO:4 (see the sequence alignment below).
SEQ ID NO:4
Sequence 66, US/17050353
Publication No. US20220153874A1
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: BIOGEN MA INC.
APPLICANT: NEURIMMUNE AG
TITLE OF INVENTION: HUMAN-DERIVED ANTI-(POLY-GA) DIPEPTIDE REPEAT (DPR) ANTIBODY
FILE REFERENCE: 13751-0309WO1
CURRENT APPLICATION NUMBER: US/17/050,353
CURRENT FILING DATE: 2020-10-23
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: 62/772,809
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2018-11-29
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: EP 18169888.7
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2018-04-27
NUMBER OF SEQ ID NOS: 84
SEQ ID NO 66
LENGTH: 30
TYPE: PRT
ORGANISM: Artificial Sequence
FEATURE:
NAME/KEY: source
OTHER INFORMATION: /note="Description of Artificial Sequence: Synthetic
dipeptide repeat protein peptide GA"
Query Match 100.0%; Score 150; Length 30;
Best Local Similarity 100.0%;
Matches 30; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 GAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGA 30
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1 GAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGA 30
US20250027084 teaches a composition comprising a polypeptide comprising SEQ ID NO:22, which is 100% identical to instant SEQ ID NO:4 (see the sequence alignment below).
SEQ ID NO:4
Sequence 22, US/18714298
Publication No. US20250027084A1
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY (en)
TITLE OF INVENTION: COMPOSITIONS FOR INHIBITING DIPEPTIDE REPEAT PROTEIN-RIBOSOMAL RNA INTERACTION AND USES THEREOF (en)
FILE REFERENCE: 121384-0190
CURRENT APPLICATION NUMBER: US/18/714,298
CURRENT FILING DATE: 2024-05-29
NUMBER OF SEQ ID NOS: 53
SEQ ID NO 22
LENGTH: 30
TYPE: PRT
FEATURE:
NAME/KEY: source
LOCATION: 1..30
QUALIFIERS: mol_type = protein
organism = synthetic construct
Query Match 100.0%; Score 150; Length 30;
Best Local Similarity 100.0%;
Matches 30; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 GAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGA 30
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1 GAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGA 30
11. 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.
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHANG-YU WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-4521. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 7:00am-5:00pm EST.
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, Jeffrey Stucker can be reached at 571-272-0911. 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.
Chang-Yu Wang
March 30, 2026
/CHANG-YU WANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1675