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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of:
(i) the structure of claim 14, and C18:2 (linoleic acid) (i.e., [EDMPC][Lin]); and
(ii-a) ionic liquid, (claims 1-14);
encompassing claims 1-14, in the reply filed on 6/26/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 15-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 6/26/2025.
Priority
Examiner acknowledges the English language translation of the foreign application has been provided, the translation of the certified copy (of the foreign application as filed), submitted together with a statement by Yutaka Morita that the translation of the certified copy is accurate. The document establishes that the elected subject matter of the priority document has support in the foreign priority document, establishing a priority date of 3/26/2020. This date is earlier than the publication date of Uddin, published 10/7/2020. (The Examiner notes that this date comparison has nothing to do with inventorship; i.e., the argument made against Uddin based on inventorship does not apply.) Thus, Uddin is no longer applicable as prior art.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 1-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102((a)(1)) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Saunders et al. (“High Sensitivity Differential Scanning Calorimetry Study of DNA-Cationic Liposome Complexes’; 2007; Pharmaceutical Research; 24(10): 1954-1961; DOI: 10.1007/s11095-007-9325-9325-1).
Saunders teaches large unilamellar liposomes of Applicant elected EDMPC with DOPE (1,2-dioleoyhosphatidylethanolamine); i.e.,
[AltContent: rect][AltContent: rect]
PNG
media_image1.png
224
266
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Construed to read on the elected compound of claim 15, where the R -C(=O)-O- moiety is substituted with an alkenyl group.
Thus, claims 1-14 are anticipated. The structure required by claim 14 is taught; accordingly, the ionic liquid characteristic is construed to be inherent to this combination of compounds. MPEP 2112.01 (I): Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). "When the PTO shows a sound basis for believing that the products of the applicant and the prior art are the same, the applicant has the burden of showing that they are not." In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Conclusion
No claim is allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY P THOMAS whose telephone number is (571)272-8994. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 6:30-5:00.
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, Ali Soroush can be reached at (571)272-9925. 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.
TIMOTHY P. THOMAS
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1614
/TIMOTHY P THOMAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1614
Prosecution Insights