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 .
Status of Application, Amendments and/or Claims
The amendment and Applicant’s arguments, filed 16 March 2026, have been entered in full. Claims 2-15 and 24 are canceled. Claims 1, 16, 17, 19-21, 23 and 25 are amended. New claims 28-30 are added. Claims 1, 16-23, 25-30 are under examination.
Foreign Priority
Acknowledgment is made of Applicant's claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d). The English translation of certified copy of BRAZIL 10 2020 0132164 (6/26/2020) has been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) (filed 25 February 2026) was received and complies with the provisions of 37 CFR §§1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609. It has been placed in the application file and the information referred to therein has been considered as to the merits.
Withdrawn Objections And/Or Rejections
The objection to the drawings as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5), as set forth at page 3 of the previous Office Action (16 September 2025), is withdrawn in view of the amendment (25 February 2026).
The objection to claims 16, 20 and 24, as set forth at pages 3-4 of the previous Office Action (16 September 2025), is withdrawn in view of the amendment (25 February 2026).
The rejections to claims 1, 16, 17, 19, 20, 23, 24 and 25 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as set forth at pages 4-8 of the previous Office Action (16 September 2025), are withdrawn in view of the amendment (25 February 2026).
The rejection to claims 1, 16-27 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, written description, as set forth at pages 8-15 of the previous Office Action (16 September 2025), are withdrawn in view of the amendment (25 February 2026).
The rejection to claims 1, 16-21, 23-25 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by Barbosa et al. (International Journal of Nanomedicine Volume 16:7153-7168, published 22 October 2021), as set forth at pages 15-16 of the previous Office Action (16 September 2025), is withdrawn in view of the submitted English Translation of certified copy BRAZIL 10 2020 0132164 (25 February 2026).
The rejection to claims 1, 18, 20-27 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kahnt et al. (Journal of Proteome Research Volume 9:5197-5208, 2010) in view of Zhang et al. (PNAS Volume 110, No. 33:13564-13569, 2013), as set forth at pages 16-19 of the previous Office Action (16 September 2025), is withdrawn in view of the amendment (25 February 2026).
The rejection to claims 16, 17 and 19 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kahnt et al. in view of Zhang et al., as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Virji (US 2013/0171184; published 04 July 2013), as set forth at pages 20-21 of the previous Office Action (16 September 2025), is withdrawn in view of the amendment (25 February 2026).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph
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 21 remains 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.
Claim 21, recites the phrase "preferably", which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
The basis for this rejection is set forth at page 5 of the previous Office Action (16 September 2025).
Applicant does not address this rejection. The rejection is maintained for reasons of record.
NEW CLAIM REJECTIONS/OBJECTIONS
Claim Rejections-35 USC § 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), First paragraph, Written description, New Matter
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, 16-23, 25-30 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. This is a New Matter Rejection.
The specification as originally filed does not provide support for the invention as now claimed: SmTSP-1 (see claim 1, 2nd line)
Applicant's amendment, filed 16 March 2026, asserts that no new matter has been added, but does not provide sufficient direction for the written description for the above-mentioned “limitations”.
The Examiner finds support for “SmTSP-2” but no written description support for “SmTSP-1”.
The specification as filed does not provide a written description or set forth the metes and bounds of this "limitations". The instant claims now recite limitations which were not disclosed in the specification as filed, and now change the scope of the instant disclosure as-filed.
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the response to this Office action. Alternatively, Applicant is invited to provide specific written support for the “limitations” indicated above or rely upon the limitations set forth in the specification as filed.
Conclusion
No claims are allowed.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to REGINA M DEBERRY whose telephone number is (571)272-0882. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-6:30 pm (alt Fri).
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, Joanne Hama can be reached at 571-272-2911. 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.
/R.M.D/Examiner, Art Unit 1647 6/2/2026
/BRIDGET E BUNNER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1647
Prosecution Insights