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 .
Claims 1-2, 4-11, 14-19, 25, 27 and 32 are pending in the present application.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 12/08/2025 is acknowledged.
Applicant also elected the following species: (i) SEQ ID NO:11 as the 5’TR and SEQ ID NO:37 as the 3’TR; (ii) SEQ ID NO:193 as the 5’TSD and SEQ ID NO: 193 as the 3’TSD; (iii) an animal cell; (iv) a plasmid; (v) a transposase; and (vi) SEQ ID NO:63 as the transposase.
Accordingly, claims 25, 27 and 32 were withdrawn from further consideration because they are directed to a non-elected invention.
Therefore, claims 1-2, 4-11 and 14-19 are examined on the merits herein with the above elected species.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 (Lack of Written Description)
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-11 and 14-19 are rejected 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. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
MPEP 2163 - 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112 require that the “specification shall contain a written description of the invention ....” This requirement is separate and distinct from the enablement requirement. Ariad Pharm., Inc. v. Eli Lilly & Co., 598 F.3d 1336, 1340, 94 USPQ2d 1161, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (en banc). Vas-Cath Inc. v. Mahurkar, 19USPQ2d 1111 (Fed. Cir. 1991), clearly states that “applicant must convey with reasonable clarity to those skilled in the art that, as of the filing date sought, he or she was in possession of the invention. The invention is, for purposes of the ‘written description’ inquiry, whatever is now claimed.” Vas-Cath Inc. v. Mahurkar, 19USPQ2d at 1117. The specification does not “clearly allow persons of ordinary skill in the art to recognize that [he or she] invented what is claimed. ”Vas-Cath Inc. v. Mahurkar, 19USPQ2d at 1116.
Claims 1-2, 4-11 and 14-16 encompass an engineered transposable element comprising, from 5’ to 3’: a 5’ terminal repeat sequence (5’TR), a heterologous nucleic acid, and a 3’ terminal repeat sequence (3’TR); wherein the 5’TR comprises a nucleic acid sequence selected from the group consisting of SEQ ID NOs: 1-26 and 79-90 (with SEQ ID NO: 11 as the elected species), any variant thereof, or any fragment of any length (e.g., 2, 3, 4, 5 or more nucleotides) thereof, in combination with any of the 3’TR comprising a nucleic acid sequence selected from the group consisting of SEQ ID NOs: 27-52 and 91-102 (with SEQ ID NO: 37 as the elected species), any variant thereof, or any fragment of any length (e.g., 2, 3, 4, 5 or more nucleotides) thereof; and wherein the engineered transposable element exhibits transposition activity that allows the heterologous nucleic acid to be inserted into a DNA of any cell (e.g., an animal cell, a mammalian cell, a plant cell, an algal cell, a fungal cell, a yeast cell, or a bacterial cell); the same engineered transposable element further comprising a 5’ target site duplication sequence (TSD) flanking the 5’ of the 5’TR or a 3’TSD flanking the 3’ of the 3’TR, wherein the 5’TSD comprises a nucleic acid sequence selected from the group consisting of SEQ ID NOs: 191-206 (with SEQ ID NO: 193 as the elected species), any variant thereof, or any fragment of any length (e.g., 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 or more nucleotides) thereof, and/or the 3’TSD comprises any nucleic acid sequence selected from the group consisting of SEQ ID NOs: 191-206 (with SEQ ID NO: 193 as the elected species), any variant thereof, or any fragment of any length (e.g., 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 or more nucleotides) thereof (dependent claims 4-5); the same engineered transposable element, wherein the transposition activity of the engineered transposable element is higher than that of a piggBac (PB) transposon, a Sleeping Beauty (SB) transposon, and/or a TcBuster (TB) transposon (dependent claim 9).
Claims 17-18 encompass a gene transfer comprising: i) an engineered transposable element of claim 1; and ii) a transposase of any structure, or a nucleic acid encoding the same transposase; preferably the transposase comprises an amino acid sequence selected from the group consisting of SEQ ID NOs: 53-78 and 103-114 (SEQ ID NO: 63 is the elected species), or any variant thereof. Claim 19 encompasses a gene transfer system comprising: i) an engineered transposable element; and ii) a transposase, or a nucleic acid encoding the transposase, wherein the engineered transposable element comprises from 5’ to 3’: a 5’TR of any structure, a heterologous nucleic acid, and a 3’TR of any structure, wherein the engineered transposable element exhibits transposition activity that allows the heterologous nucleic acid to be inserted into a DNA of a cell, and wherein the transposase comprises an amino acid sequence selected from the group consisting of SEQ ID NO:s: 53-78 and 103-114 (SEQ ID NO: 63 is the elected species), or any variant thereof.
With respect to the elected species, apart from disclosing the validated active transposable element (TE) Mariner2_AG (belonging to the TcMariner superfamily) that is derived from Anopheles gambiae, wherein the Mariner2_AG TE comprises the 5’TR having the sequence of SEQ ID NO: 11 (18 basepairs), the 3’TR having the sequence of SEQ ID NO: 37 (the complement of SEQ ID NO: 11), each of the 5’TSD and 3’TSD has the dinucleotide sequence TA (SEQ ID NO: 193), wherein the Mariner2_AG TE is recognized specifically by the transposase having the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NO: 63 (333-amino-acid sequence) and wherein the Mariner2_AG TE exhibits a heterologous nucleic acid transfer efficiency of 17.28% and 9.39% in 293T cells and HeLa cells, respectively (see at least paragraph [00112] and Table 2 at page 118); the instant specification failed to describe any other engineered Mariner2_AG TE having any 5’TR nucleic acid sequence fragment or variant of SEQ ID NO: 11 with any 3’TR nucleic acid sequence fragment or variant of SEQ ID NO: 37, let alone the combination of the 5’TR nucleic acid sequence of SEQ ID NO: 11, a fragment or a variant thereof with any 3’TR nucleic acid sequence selected from SEQ ID NOs: 27-36, 38-52 and 91-102, a fragment or a variant thereof; and yet the engineered TE is still recognized at least by the transposase having the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NO: 63 or a variant thereof and/or the engineered TE still exhibits transposition activity that allows a heterologous nucleic acid to be inserted into a DNA of any cell, and especially the transposition activity of the engineered transposable element is higher than that of PB transposon, a SB transposon and/or a TB transposon as encompassed broadly by the instant claims. For example, at least which particular amino acid sequence or a fragment of SEQ ID NO: 11 together with which particular amino acid sequence or a fragment of SEQ ID NO: 37 that the other engineered Mariner2_AG TEs possess such that they still exhibit transposition activity that allows a heterologous nucleic acid to be inserted into a DNA of a cell? Alternatively, which particular amino acid sequence or a fragment of SEQ ID NO: 11 together with which particular amino acid sequence or a fragment of anyone of SEQ ID NOs: 27-36, 38-52 and 91-102 that the other engineered Mariner2_AG TEs possess such that they still exhibit transposition activity that allows a heterologous nucleic acid to be inserted into a DNA of a cell? The instant specification fails to describe which specific modifications (e.g., substitution(s), deletion(s), insertion(s), or a combination thereof) at which particular residues in any of the recited SEQ ID NOs for the 5’TR and/or for the 3’TR, such that a nucleic acid sequence having at least about 90% sequence identity to a nucleic acid sequence selected from the group consisting of SEQ ID NOs: 1-26 and 79-90, and/or a nucleic acid sequence having at least about 90% sequence identity to a nucleic acid sequence selected from the group consisting of SEQ ID NOs: 27-52 and 91-102 still endow the engineered transposable element the recited property. For example, which particular modifications (up to about 2 nucleotide modifications for each of the elected SEQ ID NOs. 11 and 37) at which specific nucleotides that are amenable for modifications in the elected SEQ ID NOs. 11 and 37, such that the resulting engineered transposable element still exhibits transposition activity that allows a heterologous nucleic acid to be inserted into a DNA of a cell? Particularly, in a review of Mariner and the ITm superfamily of transposons, Tellier et al (Microbiology Spectrum, Volume 3; doi.org/10.1128/microbiolspec.mdna3-0033-2014, 25 pages, 2015) stated that “Across the group as a whole, the ITRs are so divergent that no consensus can be discerned. However, the ITRs are always flanked by a TA dinucleotide, which is derived from the target site and duplicated during the integration step of the reaction” (first paragraph at page 3); and “In mariner, ITRs are about 30bp and carry a single transposase binding site” (Figure 2 at page 3). Trubitsyna et al (Nucleic Acids Research 45; doi: 10.1093/nar/gkx113, 10 pages, 2017) also stated “DNA transposase enzymes can recognize short, inverted repeat (IR) DNA sequences, excise DNA flanked with IRs (transposon) and integrate it into a new location” (right column, second full paragraph at page 1). Sequence searches of record for the elected SEQ ID NOs. 11 and 37 (5’TR and 3’TR nucleic acid sequences, respectively) of the Mariner2_AG TE revealed no significant homology to other recited SEQ ID NOs. for the 5’TRs and 3’TRs of other validated active transposable elements listed in Table 2 of the present application. Similarly, the transposase of SEQ ID NO: 63 that specifically recognizes the Mariner2_AG TE merely shows 35% sequence homology to the closest transposase of SEQ ID NO: 58 for the Tcl-3 Xt TE listed in Table 2 of the present application (see attached sequence search). There is no evidence of record indicating or suggesting that the transposase of SEQ ID NO: 63 that specifically recognizes the Mariner2_AG TE is capable of recognizing the Tcl-3 Xt TE having the 5’TR sequence of SEQ ID NO: 6 and the 3’TR sequence of SEQ ID NO: 32 to mediate transposition activity that allows a heterologous nucleic acid to be inserted into a DNA of a cell, let alone any engineered transposable element of any structure and not necessarily limited to an engineered transposable element of independent claim 1 as encompassed broadly by a gene transfer system in claims 17-19. Apart from disclosing the transposase of SEQ ID NO: 63 that specifically recognizes the Mariner2_AG TE, the instant specification fails to describe any variant of SEQ ID NO: 63 that is still capable of recognizing at least the Mariner2_AG TE having the 5’TR sequence of SEQ ID NO: 11 and the 3’TR sequence of SEQ ID NO: 37, let alone engineered Mariner2_AG TEs having any fragment or any variant of SEQ ID NOs: 11 and 37, or TEs comprising any 5’TR and any 3’TR as encompassed broadly by a gene transfer system in claims 17-19. The instant specification also fails to describe completely the essential structures possessed by any engineered Mariner2_AG TE comprising the 5’TSD and/or the 3’TSD, wherein each of the 5’TSD and 3’TSD is simply a T or an A (a fragment of the elected SEQ ID NO: 193 which is TA), or any variant of the dinucleotide TA, such that the resulting Mariner2_AG TE still retains its transposition activity that allows a heterologous nucleic acid to be inserted into a DNA of a cell as encompassed broadly by dependent claims 4-5. Particularly, ITRs are always flanked by a TA dinucleotide which is a feature of Tcl/mariner transposons as taught by Tellier et al. Please note that the physiological art is recognized as unpredictable (MPEP 2164.03).
Since the prior art before the effective filing date of the present application (03/30/2020) failed to provide sufficient guidance and/or written description for the above issues as evidenced at least by the teachings of Cooper et al (US 10,570,382), Trubitsyna et al (Nucleic Acids Research 45; doi: 10.1093/nar/gkx113, 10 pages, 2017), Tellier et al (Microbiology Spectrum, Volume 3; doi.org/10.1128/microbiolspec.mdna3-0033-2014, 25 pages, 2015), Fernandez-Medina et al (BMC Genomics 12:260, 2011; IDS), Kahlon et al (Mobile DNA 2:9, 2011; IDS) and Wu et al (PNAS 103:15008-15013, 2006; IDS); it is incumbent upon the instant specification to do so. Furthermore, the instant specification also fails to provide and describe at least a representative number of species for a broad genus of an engineered transposable element and a gene transfer system as claimed broadly.
The claimed invention as a whole is not adequately described if the claims require essential or critical elements which are not adequately described in the specification and which are not conventional in the art as of Applicants’ filing date. Possession may be shown by actual reduction to practice, clear depiction of the invention in a detailed drawing, or by describing the invention with sufficient relevant identifying characteristics such that a person skilled in the art would recognize that the inventor had possession of the claimed invention. Pfaff v. Wells Electronics, Inc., 48 USPQ2d 1641, 1646 (1998). The skilled artisan cannot envision at least a representative number of species for a broad genus of an engineered transposable element and a gene transfer system as claimed broadly; and therefore conception is not achieved until reduction to practice has occurred, regardless of the complexity or simplicity of the method. Adequate written description requires more than a mere statement that it is part of the invention and reference to a potential method of isolating it. See Fiers v. Revel, 25 USPQ2d 1601, 1606 (Fed. Cir. 1993) and Amgen Inc. v. Chugai Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., 18 USPQ2d 1016 (Fed. Cir. 1991). One cannot describe what one has not conceived. See Fiddes v. Baird, 30 USPQ2d 1481, 1483.
Applicant is reminded that Vas-Cath makes clear that the written description provision of 35 U.S.C. §112 is severable from its enablement provision (see page 1115).
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.
Claim 14 is 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.
In claim 14, it is unclear what is encompassed by the limitation “healthy human cells”. This is because it is unclear which human cells would be considered or not considered to be healthy human cells. For example, it is unclear whether human cells derived from an old individual considered to be healthy human cells. Once again, clarification is requested because the metes and bounds of the claim are not clearly determined.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 1-2, 4-11 and 14-19 are rejected on the basis that it contains an improper Markush grouping of alternatives. See In re Harnisch, 631 F.2d 716, 721-22 (CCPA 1980) and Ex parte Hozumi, 3 USPQ2d 1059, 1060 (Bd. Pat. App. & Int. 1984). A Markush grouping is proper if the alternatives defined by the Markush group (i.e., alternatives from which a selection is to be made in the context of a combination or process, or alternative chemical compounds as a whole) share a “single structural similarity” and a common use. A Markush grouping meets these requirements in two situations. First, a Markush grouping is proper if the alternatives are all members of the same recognized physical or chemical class or the same art-recognized class, and are disclosed in the specification or known in the art to be functionally equivalent and have a common use. Second, where a Markush grouping describes alternative chemical compounds, whether by words or chemical formulas, and the alternatives do not belong to a recognized class as set forth above, the members of the Markush grouping may be considered to share a “single structural similarity” and common use where the alternatives share both a substantial structural feature and a common use that flows from the substantial structural feature. See MPEP § 2117.
The Markush grouping of “the 5’TR comprises a nucleic acid sequence selected from the group consisting of SEQ ID NOs: 1-26 and 79-90”, “the 3’TR comprises a nucleic acid sequence selected from the group consisting of SEQ ID NOs: 27-52 and 51-102”, or “the transposase comprises an amino acid sequence selected from the group consisting of SEQ ID NOs: 53-78 and 103-114” is improper because the alternatives defined by the Markush grouping do not share both a single structural similarity and a common use for the following reasons:
There is no apparent consensus sequence that is shared among the 5’TR selected from the group consisting of SEQ ID NOs: 1-26 and 79-90, or among the 3’TR selected from the group consisting of SEQ ID NOs: 27-52 and 51-102. Additionally, there is also no significant homology between the elected transposase having the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NO: 63 that specifically recognizes the Mariner2_AG transposable element having the 5’TR sequence of SEQ ID NO: 11 and the 3’TR sequence of SEQ ID NO: 37, with other recited SEQ ID NOs. for other transposases (SEQ ID NOs: 53-62, 64-78 and 103-114) (see Table 2 at pages 118-119 of the application). Moreover, none of a transposase comprising an amino acid sequence selected from the group consisting of SEQ ID NOs: 53-62, 64-78 and 103-114 is capable of recognizing the Mariner2_AG transposable element having the 5’TR sequence of SEQ ID NO: 11 and the 3’TR sequence of SEQ ID NO: 37 to mediate transposition activity that allows a heterologous nucleic acid to be inserted into a DNA of a cell.
To overcome this rejection, Applicant may set forth each alternative (or grouping of patentably indistinct alternatives) within an improper Markush grouping in a series of independent or dependent claims and/or present convincing arguments that the group members recited in the alternative within a single claim in fact share a single structural similarity as well as a common use.
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)(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.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Cooper et al (US 10,570,382).
With respect to the elected species, the instant claim encompasses a gene transfer system comprising: i) an engineered transposable element; and ii) a transposase, or a nucleic acid encoding the transposase, wherein the engineered transposable element comprises from 5’ to 3’: a 5’TR, a heterologous nucleic acid, and a 3’TR, wherein the engineered transposable element exhibits transposition activity that allows the heterologous nucleic acid to be inserted into a DNA of a cell, and wherein the transposase comprises an amino acid sequence selected from the group consisting of SEQ ID NO:s: 53-78 and 103-114 (SEQ ID NO: 63 is the elected species), or a variant thereof. The term a “variant” is defined by the present application to mean a polynucleotide or a polypeptide that differs from a reference polynucleotide or polypeptide, respectively, but retains essential properties (paragraph [0061]).
Cooper et al already disclosed a transposase system comprising a recombinant transposase having the sequence of SEQ ID NO: 3 (hSB81) that is 34% sequence identity to the elected SEQ ID NO: 63 of the present application (a variant of SEQ ID NO: 63) or a nucleic acid encoding the same transposase and a DNA vector comprising a sequence encoding a selected genetic element (e.g., siRNA, a CAR, or a therapeutic polypeptide) flanked by transposon repeats for genetically engineering a cell (e.g., human cells such as human immune cells that include T helper cells, cytotoxic T cells or NK T cells (see at least Summary of the Invention; particularly col. 4, lines 21-60; col. 15, lines 53-67; Fig. 1 and attached sequence search below). Fig. 1 depicts an exemplary for transposase-based engineering of cells as shown below.
PNG
media_image1.png
687
348
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Thus, the teachings of Cooper et al meet every limitation of the instant claim. Therefore, the reference anticipates the instant claim.
Conclusions
No claim is allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Quang Nguyen, Ph.D., at (571) 272-0776.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s SPE, James Douglas (Doug) Schultz, Ph.D., may be reached at (571) 272-0763.
To aid in correlating any papers for this application, all further correspondence regarding this application should be directed to Group Art Unit 1631; Central Fax No. (571) 273-8300.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to (571) 272-0547.
Patent applicants with problems or questions regarding electronic images that can be viewed in the Patent Application Information Retrieval system (PAIR) can now contact the USPTO’s Patent Electronic Business Center (Patent EBC) for assistance. Representatives are available to answer your questions daily from 6 am to midnight (EST). The toll-free number is (866) 217-9197. When calling please have your application serial or patent number, the type of document you are having an image problem with, the number of pages and the specific nature of the problem. The Patent Electronic Business Center will notify applicants of the resolution of the problem within 5-7 business days. Applicants can also check PAIR to confirm that the problem has been corrected. The USPTO’s Patent Electronic Business Center is a complete service center supporting all patent business on the Internet. The USPTO’s PAIR system provides Internet-based access to patent application status and history information. It also enables applicants to view the scanned images of their own application file folder(s) as well as general patent information available to the public.
/QUANG NGUYEN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1631
Sequence 58, US/17915964
ORGANISM: Xenopus tropicalis
Query Match 35.5%; Score 639.5; Length 340;
Best Local Similarity 40.5%;
Matches 139; Conservative 55; Mismatches 136; Indels 13; Gaps 4;
Qy 1 MGRSAHSTQQQRLDIKRLSAAGYSQRKIAEILGRSKTFV------YNALHSTGTKIPTGR 54
||:: :: | | | || : |:: || | | : | : :|
Db 1 MGKTKELSKDVRDKIVDLHKAGMGYKTISKKLGEKVTTVGAIVRKWKEHKMTINRPRSGA 60
Qy 55 PRKTSARDDARMTRLCKADPFKSARAIRDELQL---SVSDRTVQRRLFENNLVGRNPRKV 111
||| | | : : | | | : : ::|:| :|: :|: | | | |||
Db 61 PRKISPRGVSMILRKVKKHPRTTREELVNDLKLAGTTVTKKTIGNTLHRNGLKSCRARKV 120
Qy 112 PLLRRCHVQARLQFAREHYDWAGENLNKWRNVLWSDESKVNLVGSDGKRFVRRPKNTAYR 171
|||:: ||||||:|| || : :::: | ||||||:|: | | : | | | || ||
Db 121 PLLKKAHVQARLKFANEHLN---DSVSDWEKVLWSDETKIELFGINSTRCVWRKKNAAYD 177
Qy 172 PQYTLKTVKHGGGNIMVWACFSWYGVGPIFWIKDIMDQHRYLNIIQTVMLPHA-EWEMPL 230
|| |: |||||||||::| ||| | | : | || | |: :|| | : :|
Db 178 PQNTVPTVKHGGGNILLWGCFSAKGTGQLIRINGKMDGAMYREILNDNLLPSARKLKMGR 237
Qy 231 KWQFMHDNDPKHTAKAVKKWFVDQKIDVMNWPAQSPDLNPIENLWKIVKAKLPPAGSRTK 290
| | ||||||||||| |:| : | || ||:||||||||||||: :| :: |
Db 238 GWVFQHDNDPKHTAKATKEWLKKKHIKVMEWPSQSPDLNPIENLWRELKLRVAQRQPRNL 297
Qy 291 EKLWKHIENAWYSIPPSTCKSLVESMPKRMRAVIRNNGHATKY 333
| : | :||| | :|| : ||: :|: | | :|||
Db 298 RDLEMICKEEWTNIPPKMCANLVINYKKRLTSVLANKGFSTKY 340
Sequence 3,
Patent No. 10570382
TITLE OF INVENTION: TRANSPOSASE POLYPEPTIDES AND USES THEREOF
Query Match 34.3%; Score 618.5; Length 340;
Best Local Similarity 41.3%;
Matches 142; Conservative 58; Mismatches 129; Indels 15; Gaps 7;
Qy 1 MGRSAHSTQQQRLDIKRLSAAGYSQRKIAEILG--RS--KTFVYNALHSTGTKIP---TG 53
||:| :| | | | :| | |:: | || :| | | || | :|
Db 1 MGKSKEISQDLRKRIVDLHKSGSSLGAISKRLAVPRSSVQTIVRKYKHH-GTTQPSYRSG 59
Qy 54 RPRKTSARDDARMTRLCKADPFKSAR---AIRDELQLSVSDRTVQRRLFENNLVGRNPRK 110
| | | ||: : | : :| :|: : :| || ||:| |: :|| | : ||
Db 60 RRRVLSPRDERTLVRKVQINPRTTAKDLVKMLEETGTKVSISTVKRVLYRHNLKGHSARK 119
Qy 111 VPLLRRCHVQARLQFAREHYDWAGENLNKWRNVLWSDESKVNLVGSDGKRFVRRPKNTAY 170
|||: | :|||:||| | | :: |||||||||:|: | | : |:| | | |
Db 120 KPLLQNRHKKARLRFARAHGD---KDRTFWRNVLWSDETKIELFGHNDHRYVWRKKGEAC 176
Qy 171 RPQYTLKTVKHGGGNIMVWACFSWYGVGPIFWIKDIMDQHRYLNII-QTVMLPHAEWEMP 229
:|: |: |||||||:||:| ||: | | : | ||| :|::|: | : : ::
Db 177 KPKNTIPTVKHGGGSIMLWGCFAAGGTGALHKIDGIMDAVQYVDILKQHLKTSVRKLKLG 236
Qy 230 LKWQFMHDNDPKHTAKAVKKWFVDQKIDVMNWPAQSPDLNPIENLWKIVKAKLPPAGSRT 289
|| | ||||||||:| |:|| | |: |: ||:|||||||||||| :| ::
Db 237 RKWVFQHDNDPKHTSKHVRKWLKDNKVKVLEWPSQSPDLNPIENLWAELKKRVRARRPTN 296
Qy 290 KEKLWKHIENAWYSIPPSTCKSLVESMPKRMRAVIRNNGHATKY 333
:| : : | | |: | ||| |||: | : |:||||
Db 297 LTQLHQLCQEEWAKIHPTYCGKLVEGYPKRLTQVKQFKGNATKY 340