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
Status of Application, Amendments, and/or Claims
Applicant's amendment filed on 06/01/2026 has been entered. Claims 10-12 are canceled. Claim 40 is added. Claims 1-3, 13, 15, 19-20, 23-29, 31, 33, and 40 are pending. Claims 1-3, 13, 15, 19-20, and 40 are currently under consideration. Claims 23-29, 31, and 33 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention.
Withdrawn Objections and/or Rejections
The rejection of claims 12 and 19 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) is withdrawn in view of amended claims.
The objection to claim 3 is withdrawn in view of amended claim 3.
Claim Rejections under 35 USC § 112 (a)
(i). The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 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.
(ii). Claims 1-2, 13, 15, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a), 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 at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The basis for the rejection is set forth in the office action mailed on 03/04/2026.
Applicant argues that the claims have amended to specify that the LRRC 15 antibody comprises ABBV-085. Applicant argues that the claims, as amended, recite a particular conserved structure and distinguishing feature, i.e. the anti-LRRC 15 antibody ABBV-085.
This is not persuasive because claims 1-2, 13, 15, and 19-20 do not recite the particular anti-LRRC 15 antibody, ABBV-085.
Claim Rejections under 35 USC § 112 (b)
(i). The following is a quotation of the second paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112:
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.
(ii). A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c).
In the present instance, claim 2 recites the broad recitation “wherein said composition further comprises a pharmaceutically acceptable excipient or carrier”, and the claim also recites “optionally a nanocarrier or nanoparticle suitable for direct injection into a joint”, which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
(iii). Claims 3 and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 3 and 40 are indefinite because they recite the acronym, “ABBV-085”. First, such a term is determined arbitrarily without a definitive structure. Others in the field may prepare the same antibody and give it an entirely different name. Thus, claiming an antibody by a particular name given to the antibody by various workers in the field fails to distinctly claim what the antibody is. Applicants should particularly point out the claimed antibody by reciting characteristics associated with the antibody, such as a sequence identifier (SEQ ID NO).
Conclusion
No claims are allowed.
Advisory Information
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ruixiang Li whose telephone number is (571) 272-0875. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from 8:30 am to 5:00 pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Vanessa Ford, can be reached on (571) 272-0857. The fax number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, please contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at the toll-free phone number 866-217-9197.
/RUIXIANG LI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1674 July 26, 2026
Prosecution Insights