Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 05, 2026
Application No. 17/917,506

SUPPLEMENTS AND COMPOSITIONS CONTAINING AMINO ACIDS AND IGF-1 AND METHODS OF USE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Oct 06, 2022
Priority
Apr 07, 2020 — provisional 63/006,313 +1 more
Examiner
LEBLANC, KATHERINE DEGUIRE
Art Unit
1791
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Puretein Bioscience LLC
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
34%
Grant Probability
At Risk
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
70%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 34% of cases
34%
Career Allowance Rate
205 granted / 601 resolved
-30.9% vs TC avg
Strong +36% interview lift
Without
With
+35.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 9m
Avg Prosecution
49 currently pending
Career history
649
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
94.3%
+54.3% vs TC avg
§102
1.4%
-38.6% vs TC avg
§112
2.8%
-37.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 601 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 4/13/2026 has been entered. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim(s) 1-5,7-10, 12-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Casebolt(US 2018/0021410) in view of White(WO 00/64283). Regarding claims 1-5,7,13, Casebolt teaches a supplement comprising active IGF-1 in an amount of at least 50ng/kg of animal or human to no greater than 150,000ng/kg of animal or human weight(abstract, para 6,para 40) . This would equate to 0.050 micrograms to 150 micrograms per kg of animal or human. Casebolt teaches an animal weight of 290 lb(131kg)(table 2). Therefore, the supplement comprises 6.55 to 19,650 micrograms of active IGF-I. Casebolt does not teach the presence of glutamine, leucine, and arginine. However, White teaches a nutritional supplement comprising free amino acids glutamine, leucine and arginine salts, wherein the supplement increases IGF-1 levels(abstract). White teaches that the supplement comprises glutamine in an amount of 500 to 1000mg, leucine in an amount of 400mg to 1000mg, and 500 to 1500mg of arginine(p.7, line 12-21). Therefore, selecting 1000mg of glutamine, 400mg of leucine, and 500mg of arginine and converting to mols(based on the molar mass of glutamine 146.14g/mol, leucine 131.17g/mol, and arginine 174g/mol), the molar ratio of 2.3:1:1. It would have been obvious to modify Casebolt with White by including glutamine, leucine, and arginine with IGF-1 in the claimed ratio because White teaches that these amino acids help to increase IGF-1 levels in the body. The supplement as a whole comprises 6.55 to 19,650 micrograms of active IGF-I as taught in Casebolt and 1000mg of glutamine, 400mg of leucine, and 500mg of arginine as taught in White. Casebolt teaches feeding of 1.20lb(0.54) of food(the supplement) to an animal(table 1, see ADFI Average daily feed intake). Therefore, the supplement would comprise 12.11 to 36,355 micrograms of active IGF-1/kg of supplement, which overlaps the claimed range of at least 100 micrograms to no greater than 2000 micrograms active IGF-1/kg of supplement and renders it obvious. Regarding claim 8, Casebolt teaches that the IGF-1 is a recombinant IGF-1(para 25) Regarding claims 9,10,14-16, Casebolt teaches that the supplement can be present in animal feed(para 5). Casebolt is silent on the amount of supplement per ton. However, since Casebolt teaches an amount of IGF-I per kg of animal and White teaches amounts of amino acids to be consumed daily, it would have been obvious to adjust the amount of supplement per ton in order to deliver the correct amount of amino acids and IGF-1 to the human or animal. Regarding claim 12, White teaches that the supplement comprises 8 amino acids all with similar dosages of 500mg to 1500mg(p.7, line 12-21). Therefore, the total wt% percent of L-glutamine, L-leucine, and L-arginine is less than the total wt% of other amino acids in the supplement. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 4/13/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant argues that Casebolt does not teach at least 100 micrograms to no greater than 2000 micrograms active IGF-1/kg of supplement. However, the supplement as a whole comprises 6.55 to 19,650 micrograms of active IGF-I as taught in Casebolt and 1000mg of glutamine, 400mg of leucine, and 500mg of arginine as taught in White. Casebolt teaches feeding of 1.20lb(0.54) of food(the supplement) to an animal(table 1, see ADFI Average daily feed intake). Therefore, the supplement would comprise 12.11 to 36,355 micrograms of active IGF-1/kg of supplement, which overlaps the claimed range of at least 100 micrograms to no greater than 2000 micrograms active IGF-1/kg of supplement and renders it obvious. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATHERINE D LEBLANC whose telephone number is (571)270-1136. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-4PM EST M-F. 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, Nikki Dees can be reached at 571-270-3435. 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. /KATHERINE D LEBLANC/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1791
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 06, 2022
Application Filed
Sep 10, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103
Dec 09, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 13, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §103
Apr 13, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Apr 15, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 22, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12667116
METHODS OF COVERING FROZEN FOOD PRODUCTS IN CHOCOLATE
4y 11m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12667113
METHOD OF REMOVING SPORES FROM RAW GOAT MILK, PROCESS FOR PREPARING PURIFIED GOAT MILK, GOAT MILK ACCORDINGLY PRODUCED AND ITS USE AND CHEESE MAKING METHOD
4y 7m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12622443
COLD BREW BEVERAGE
3y 8m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Patent 12616235
MULTILAYER EDIBLE PRODUCTS COMPRISING A CENTER AND A BARRIER LAYER
7y 4m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Patent 12610972
CEREAL FLAKES
4y 3m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
34%
Grant Probability
70%
With Interview (+35.7%)
3y 9m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 601 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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