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
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
1. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on December 29, 2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
2. Claims 1, 2 and 12 have been amended and claim 16 canceled as requested in the amendment filed on December 29, 2025. Following the amendment, claims 1-6, 8-10, 12, 17-22 and 27 are pending in the instant application.
3. Claims 17-22 stand withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention(s), there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on June 09, 2025.
4. Claims 1-6, 8-10, 12 and 27 are under examination in the instant office action.
5. Any objection or rejection of record, which is not expressly repeated in this action has been overcome by Applicant’s response and withdrawn.
Claim Objections
6. Claims 8 and 9 are objected to because of the following informalities:
The claims recite “L1CAM” without first providing the full name of the term. It is suggested that the term be spelled out at its first use and in all independent claims so that it is clearly understood what it stands for. Appropriate correction is suggested.
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.
7. Claims 10 and 12 are 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.
8. Claim 10 recites the limitation "the biomarker" in claim 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
9. Claim 12 is vague and indefinite insofar as it employs the term “condition[s] related to PD,” as a limitation. This term is not known in the relevant prior art of record as being associated with well-defined genus of molecular embodiments. Moreover, because the instant specification does not identify that property or combination of properties which is unique to and, therefore, definitive of a “condition related to PD”, an artisan cannot determine if a condition which meets all of the other limitations of a claim would then be included or excluded from the claimed subject matter by the presence of this limitation.
Double Patenting
10. Claim(s) 1-6, and 8-10 stand provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 13-17 of copending Application No. 17/775,602 (reference application) for reasons of record in section 15 of Paper mailed on October 03, 2025.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Conclusion
11. Claim 27 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
12. No claim is allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OLGA N CHERNYSHEV whose telephone number is (571)272-0870. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM to 5:30PM, Monday to Friday.
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.
/OLGA N CHERNYSHEV/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1675
February 23, 2026