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
2. The election filed on 12/11/2025 in response to the Office Action of 10/09/2025 is acknowledged and has been entered.
Applicant has elected Group I, claims 1-2, 4-6, 10 and 12-18, drawn to a bispecific antibody or an antigen-binding portion thereof, comprising: (a )a first binding domain that binds to CD20 on the surface of a target cell, the first binding domain comprising: (i) a first light chain, and (ii) a first heavy chain; wherein the first light chain comprises CDR1, CDR2, and CDR3 comprising the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NOs: 61, 62, and 63, respectively, and wherein the first heavy chain comprises CDR1, CDR2, and CDR3 comprising the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NOs: 76, 77, and 85, respectively: and (b) a second binding domain that binds to CD3 on the surface of a T cell, the second binding domain comprising: (iii) a second light chains and (iv) a second heavy chain; wherein the second light chain comprises CDR1, CDR2, and CDR3 comprising the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NOs: 7, 8, and 21, respectively, and wherein the second heavy chain comprises CDR1, CDR2, and CDR3 comprising the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NOs: 26, 27, and 28, respectively.
Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out any supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse. See MPEP 818.03(a).
3. Claims 1-2 and 4-18 are pending in the application. Claims 7-9 and 11 have been withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/11/2025.
Claims 1-2, 4-6, 10 and 12-18 are currently under prosecution.
Priority
5. Applicant’s claim under 35 U.S.C. §§ 365(c) for benefit of the earlier filing date of application, is acknowledged.
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
7. The following is a quotation 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.
8. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph:
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.
9. Claims 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, because the specification, while being enabling for making and using a method of treating cancer (e.g., leukemia or lymphoma) in a subject, does not reasonably provide enablement for making and/or using the claimed invention. The specification does not enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention commensurate in scope with these claims.
M.P.E.P. § 2164.01 states:
The standard for determining whether the specification meets the enablement requirement was cast in the Supreme Court decision of Mineral Separation v. Hyde, 242 U.S. 261, 270 (1916) which postured the question: is the experimentation needed to practice the invention undue or unreasonable? That standard is still the one to be applied. In re Wands, 858 F.2d 731, 737, 8 USPQ2d 1400, 1404 (Fed. Cir. 1988). Accordingly, even though the statute does not use the term "undue experimentation," it has been interpreted to require that the claimed invention be enabled so that any person skilled in the art can make and use the invention without undue experimentation. In re Wands, 858 F.2d at 737, 8 USPQ2d at 1404 (Fed. Cir. 1988).
There are many factors to be considered when determining whether there is sufficient evidence to support a determination that a disclosure does not satisfy the enablement requirement and whether any necessary experimentation is “undue”. These factors, which have been outlined in the Federal Circuit decision of In re Wands, 858 F.2d 731, 737, 8 USPQ2d 1400, 1404 (Fed. Cir. 1988), include, but are not limited to, the nature of the invention, the state of the prior art, the relative skill of those in the art, the amount of direction or guidance disclosed in the specification, the presence or absence of working examples, the predictability or unpredictability of the art, the breadth of the claims, and the quantity of experimentation which would be required in order to practice the invention as claimed. See also Ex parte Forman, 230 USPQ 546 (BPAI 1986).
The amount of guidance, direction, and exemplification disclosed in the specification, as filed, would not be sufficient to enable the skilled artisan to use the claimed invention at the time the application was filed without undue and/or unreasonable experimentation.
The reasons the claims are rejected herein are largely the same as the reasons the claims are rejected as failing to satisfy the written description requirement. In essence, what is claimed but not adequately described to permit the skilled artisan to immediately envision, recognize or distinguish from other material, so as to satisfy the written description requirement, cannot be made and then used without undue and unreasonable experimentation.
In this instance, the claims 13-16 are drawn to a method of preventing cancer (e.g., leukemia or lymphoma) in a subject.
One cannot extrapolate the teaching of the specification to the enablement of the claims because the specification provides insufficient example or guidance for claimed preventing cancer in a subject. The specification only teaches treating cancer in a subject; see Examples 11-12 of the specification.
Reasonable guidance with respect to preventing any cancer relies on quantitative analysis from defined populations which have been successfully pre-screened and are predisposed to particular types of cancer or have had cancer. The essential element towards the validation of a preventive therapeutic is the ability to test the drug on subjects monitored in advance of clinical cancer and link those results with subsequent histological confirmation of the presence or absence of disease. This irrefutable link between antecedent drug and subsequent knowledge of the prevention of the disease is the essence of a valid preventive agent. Further, a preventive administration also must assume that the therapeutic will be safe and tolerable for anyone susceptible to the disease. All of this underscores the criticality of providing workable examples which are not disclosed in the specification with regards to the claimed preventing cancer in a subject; the specification does not disclose sufficient guidance or objective evidence that claimed method would predictably prevent cancer in a subject.
The prevention of cancer is highly unpredictable. The majority of studies suggest that the essential element towards the validation of a preventive therapeutic is the ability to test the drug on subjects monitored in advance of clinical cancer and link those results with subsequent histological confirmation of the presence or absence of disease. Further, reasonable guidance with respect to correlating agents that prevent cancer may depend upon quantitative analysis from defined populations that have been successfully pre-screened and are predisposed to particular types of cancer. This type of data might be derived from widespread genetic analysis, cancer clusters, or family histories. For example, Byers, T. (CA Cancer Journal, 1999, 49: 353-361) teaches that randomized controlled trials are commonly regarded as the definitive study for proving causality (1st col., p.358), and that in controlled trials the random assignment of subjects to the intervention eliminates the problems of dietary recalls and controls the effects of both known and unknown confounding factors. Further, Byers suggests that chemo-preventative trials be designed “long-term” such that testing occurs over many years (2nd col., p. 359). The specification is devoid of any models or experimental analysis that reasonably suggests that the claimed method would predictably prevent cancer in a subject. This, combined with the state of the art of preventing cancer, suggests that undue experimentation would be required to practice the invention as claimed.
In deciding In re Fisher, 166 USPQ 18, 24 (CCPA 1970), the Court indicated the more unpredictable an area is, the more specific enablement is necessary in order to satisfy the statute. “Tossing out the mere germ of an idea does not constitute enabling disclosure. While every aspect of a generic claim certainly need not have been carried out by an inventor, or exemplified in the specification, reasonable detail must be provided in order to enable members of the public to understand and carry out the invention.” Genentech Inc. v. Novo Nordisk A/S, 42 USPQ2d 1001, 1005 (CA FC 1997).
In conclusion, upon careful consideration of the factors used to determine whether undue experimentation is required, in accordance with the Federal Circuit decision of In re Wands, 858 F.2d at 737, 8 USPQ2d at 1404 (Fed. Cir. 1988), the amount of guidance, direction, and exemplification disclosed in the specification, as filed, is not deemed sufficient to have enabled the skilled artisan to make and/or use the claimed invention at the time the application was filed without undue and/or unreasonable experimentation.
10. 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 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
11. 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.
12. Claims 1, 10 and 12-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Engelberts et al. (US 20170355767, published on 12/14/2017).
Claims 1, 10 and 12-16 are herein drawn to a bispecific antibody or an antigen-binding portion thereof, comprising: (a )a first binding domain that binds to CD20 on the surface of a target cell, the first binding domain comprising: (i) a first light chain, and (ii) a first heavy chain; wherein the first light chain comprises CDR1, CDR2, and CDR3 comprising the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NOs: 61, 62, and 63, respectively, and wherein the first heavy chain comprises CDR1, CDR2, and CDR3 comprising the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NOs: 76, 77, and 85, respectively: and (b) a second binding domain that binds to CD3 on the surface of a T cell, the second binding domain comprising: (iii) a second light chains and (iv) a second heavy chain; wherein the second light chain comprises CDR1, CDR2, and CDR3 comprising the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NOs: 7, 8, and 21, respectively, and wherein the second heavy chain comprises CDR1, CDR2, and CDR3 comprising the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NOs: 26, 27, and 28.
Engelberts et al. teach a bispecific anti-CD3 and CD20 antibody, wherein the CD20 binding domain comprising a VH sequence as set forth in SEQ ID NO:37 and a VL sequence as set forth in SEQ ID NO:28, wherein the CD3 binding domain comprising a VH sequence as set forth in SEQ ID NO:6 and a VL sequence as set forth in SEQ ID NO:10; see entire document, e.g., title, abstract, [0124], [0138], [0148], [0180], claims 1, 12-13 and 31.
Instant claimed CDRs 1-6 of CD20 binding domain (SEQ ID NOs: 61-63, 76-77 and 85) and CDRs 1-6 of CD3 binding domain (SEQ ID NOs: 7-8, 21 and 26-28) are fall within SEQ ID NOs: 37, 28, 6 and 10 of Engelberts et al., see below sequences alignment 1.
For claim 12, Engelberts et al. teach a kit comprising a bispecific antibody binds to CD20 and CD3; see claim 70.
For claims 13-16, Engelberts et al. teach a method of treating cancer in a subject, comprising administering a bispecific anti-CD3 and CD20 antibody to the subject, wherein the cancer is non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) or Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (ALL); see [0542-0545].
Double Patenting
13. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at issue are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
14. Claims 1-2, 4-6, 10 and 12-18 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-19 of copending Application No. 18/038159. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other for the following reasons:
Claims 1-2, 4-6, 10 and 12-18 are herein drawn to a bispecific antibody or an antigen-binding portion thereof, comprising: (a) a first binding domain that binds to CD20, comprising a first light chain variable region comprising the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NO: 59 and a first heavy chain variable region comprising the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NO: 83; and (b) a second binding domain that binds to CD3, comprising a second light chain variable region comprising the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NO: 18 and a second heavy chain variable region comprising the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NO: 50.
Claims 1-19 of copending Application No. 18/038159 are drawn to a bispecific antibody comprises: (a) a first binding domain that binds to CD20, comprising a first light chain variable region comprising the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NO: 54 and a first heavy chain variable region comprising the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NO: 56; and (b) a second binding domain that binds to CD3, comprising a second light chain variable region comprising the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NO: 18 and a second heavy chain variable region comprising the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NO: 50.
SEQ ID NOs: 54, 56, 18 and 50 of copending Application No. 18/038159 are 100% identical with the instant claimed SEQ ID NOs: 59, 83, 18 and 50; see below sequences alignment 2.
This is a provisional obviousness-type double patenting rejection because the conflicting claims have not in fact been patented.
Conclusion
15. No claim is allowed.
16. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YAN XIAO whose telephone number is (571)270-3578. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 EST.
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, Samira Jean-Louis can be reached on 571-270-3503. 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.
/YAN XIAO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1642
Sequences alignment 1
US-15-541-594-37
Filing date in PALM: 2017-07-05
Sequence 37, US/15541594
Publication No. US20170355767A1
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: Genmab A/S
TITLE OF INVENTION: BISPECIFIC ANTIBODIES AGAINST CD3 AND CD20
FILE REFERENCE: GMI-147USE
CURRENT APPLICATION NUMBER: US/15/541,594
CURRENT FILING DATE: 2017-07-05
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PCT/EP2016/050296
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2016-01-08
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PCT/EP2015/050276
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2015-01-08
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PA 2015 00412
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2015-07-15
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PA 2015 00413
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2015-07-15
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PA 2015 00415
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2015-07-16
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PA 2015 00416
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2015-07-16
NUMBER OF SEQ ID NOS: 87
SEQ ID NO 37
LENGTH: 122
TYPE: PRT
ORGANISM: homo sapiens
Query Match 84.1%; Score 167.4; Length 122;
Best Local Similarity 42.5%;
Matches 34; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 46; Gaps 2;
Qy 1 DYAMH--------------TISWNSGSIGYADSVKG------------------------ 22
||||| |||||||||||||||||
Db 31 DYAMHWVRQAPGKGLEWVSTISWNSGSIGYADSVKGRFTISRDNAKKSLYLQMNSLRAED 90
Qy 23 --------DIQYGNYYYGMD 34
||||||||||||
Db 91 TALYYCAKDIQYGNYYYGMD 110
US-15-541-594-28
Filing date in PALM: 2017-07-05
Sequence 28, US/15541594
Publication No. US20170355767A1
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: Genmab A/S
TITLE OF INVENTION: BISPECIFIC ANTIBODIES AGAINST CD3 AND CD20
FILE REFERENCE: GMI-147USE
CURRENT APPLICATION NUMBER: US/15/541,594
CURRENT FILING DATE: 2017-07-05
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PCT/EP2016/050296
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2016-01-08
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PCT/EP2015/050276
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2015-01-08
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PA 2015 00412
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2015-07-15
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PA 2015 00413
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2015-07-15
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PA 2015 00415
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2015-07-16
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PA 2015 00416
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2015-07-16
NUMBER OF SEQ ID NOS: 87
SEQ ID NO 28
LENGTH: 107
TYPE: PRT
ORGANISM: homo sapiens
Query Match 81.7%; Score 110.3; Length 107;
Best Local Similarity 36.5%;
Matches 27; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 47; Gaps 2;
Qy 1 RASQSVSSYLA---------------DASNRAT--------------------------- 18
||||||||||| |||||||
Db 24 RASQSVSSYLAWYQQKPGQAPRLLIYDASNRATGIPARFSGSGSGTDFTLTISSLEPEDF 83
Qy 19 -----QQRSNWPIT 27
|||||||||
Db 84 AVYYCQQRSNWPIT 97
US-15-541-594-6
Filing date in PALM: 2017-07-05
Sequence 6, US/15541594
Publication No. US20170355767A1
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: Genmab A/S
TITLE OF INVENTION: BISPECIFIC ANTIBODIES AGAINST CD3 AND CD20
FILE REFERENCE: GMI-147USE
CURRENT APPLICATION NUMBER: US/15/541,594
CURRENT FILING DATE: 2017-07-05
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PCT/EP2016/050296
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2016-01-08
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PCT/EP2015/050276
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2015-01-08
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PA 2015 00412
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2015-07-15
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PA 2015 00413
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2015-07-15
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PA 2015 00415
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2015-07-16
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PA 2015 00416
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2015-07-16
NUMBER OF SEQ ID NOS: 87
SEQ ID NO 6
LENGTH: 125
TYPE: PRT
ORGANISM: Mus Musculus
Query Match 88.5%; Score 189.3; Length 125;
Best Local Similarity 44.7%;
Matches 38; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 47; Gaps 2;
Qy 1 NTYAMN---------------IRSKYNNYATYYADSVKD--------------------- 24
|||||| ||||||||||||||||||
Db 30 NTYAMNWVRQAPGKGLEWVARIRSKYNNYATYYADSVKDRFTISRDDSKSSLYLQMNNLK 89
Qy 25 -----------HGNFGNSYVSWFAY 38
||||||||||||||
Db 90 TEDTAMYYCVRHGNFGNSYVSWFAY 114
US-15-541-594-10
Filing date in PALM: 2017-07-05
Sequence 10, US/15541594
Publication No. US20170355767A1
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: Genmab A/S
TITLE OF INVENTION: BISPECIFIC ANTIBODIES AGAINST CD3 AND CD20
FILE REFERENCE: GMI-147USE
CURRENT APPLICATION NUMBER: US/15/541,594
CURRENT FILING DATE: 2017-07-05
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PCT/EP2016/050296
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2016-01-08
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PCT/EP2015/050276
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2015-01-08
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PA 2015 00412
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2015-07-15
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PA 2015 00413
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2015-07-15
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PA 2015 00415
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2015-07-16
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PA 2015 00416
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2015-07-16
NUMBER OF SEQ ID NOS: 87
SEQ ID NO 10
LENGTH: 109
TYPE: PRT
ORGANISM: Mus Musculus
Query Match 83.0%; Score 139.4; Length 109;
Best Local Similarity 39.0%;
Matches 30; Conservative 0; Mismatches 1; Indels 46; Gaps 2;
Qy 1 RSSTGAVTTSNYAN--------------GGTNKRAP------------------------ 22
|||||||||||||| ||||||||
Db 23 RSSTGAVTTSNYANWVQQTPGQAFRGLIGGTNKRAPGVPARFSGSLIGDKAALTITGAQA 82
Qy 23 --------VLWYSNLWV 31
||||||||
Db 83 DDESIYFCALWYSNLWV 99
Sequences alignment 2
US-18-038-159-54
Filing date in PALM: 2023-05-22
Sequence 54, US/18038159
Publication No. US20240002540A1
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: KEYMED BIOSCIENCES CO., LTD
TITLE OF INVENTION: BISPECIFIC ANTIBODY AND USE THEREOF
FILE REFERENCE: 51426-0006US1
CURRENT APPLICATION NUMBER: US/18/038,159
CURRENT FILING DATE: 2023-05-22
NUMBER OF SEQ ID NOS: 95
SEQ ID NO 54
LENGTH: 214
TYPE: PRT
ORGANISM: Homo sapiens
Query Match 100.0%; Score 558; Length 214;
Best Local Similarity 100.0%;
Matches 107; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 EIVLTQSPGTLSLSPGERATLSCRASQSVSSYLAWYQQKPGQAPRLLIYDASNRATGIPD 60
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1 EIVLTQSPGTLSLSPGERATLSCRASQSVSSYLAWYQQKPGQAPRLLIYDASNRATGIPD 60
Qy 61 RFSGSGSGTDFTLTISRLEPEDFAVYYCQQRSNWPITFGQGTKLEIK 107
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 61 RFSGSGSGTDFTLTISRLEPEDFAVYYCQQRSNWPITFGQGTKLEIK 107
US-18-038-159-56
Filing date in PALM: 2023-05-22
Sequence 56, US/18038159
Publication No. US20240002540A1
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: KEYMED BIOSCIENCES CO., LTD
TITLE OF INVENTION: BISPECIFIC ANTIBODY AND USE THEREOF
FILE REFERENCE: 51426-0006US1
CURRENT APPLICATION NUMBER: US/18/038,159
CURRENT FILING DATE: 2023-05-22
NUMBER OF SEQ ID NOS: 95
SEQ ID NO 56
LENGTH: 449
TYPE: PRT
ORGANISM: Homo sapiens
Query Match 100.0%; Score 655; Length 449;
Best Local Similarity 100.0%;
Matches 122; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 EVQLLESGGGVVQPGGSLRLSCAASGFTFNDYAMHWVRQAPGKGLEWVSTISWNSGSIGY 60
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1 EVQLLESGGGVVQPGGSLRLSCAASGFTFNDYAMHWVRQAPGKGLEWVSTISWNSGSIGY 60
Qy 61 ADSVKGRFTISRDNSKNTLYLQMNSLRAEDTAVYYCAKDIQYGNYYYGMDYWGQGTLVTV 120
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 61 ADSVKGRFTISRDNSKNTLYLQMNSLRAEDTAVYYCAKDIQYGNYYYGMDYWGQGTLVTV 120
Qy 121 SS 122
||
Db 121 SS 122
US-18-038-159-18
Filing date in PALM: 2023-05-22
Sequence 18, US/18038159
Publication No. US20240002540A1
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: KEYMED BIOSCIENCES CO., LTD
TITLE OF INVENTION: BISPECIFIC ANTIBODY AND USE THEREOF
FILE REFERENCE: 51426-0006US1
CURRENT APPLICATION NUMBER: US/18/038,159
CURRENT FILING DATE: 2023-05-22
NUMBER OF SEQ ID NOS: 95
SEQ ID NO 18
LENGTH: 109
TYPE: PRT
ORGANISM: Homo sapiens
Query Match 100.0%; Score 578; Length 109;
Best Local Similarity 100.0%;
Matches 109; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 QAVVTQEPSLTVSPGGTVTLTCRSSTGAVTTSNYANWVQEKPGQAPRGLIGGTNKRAPWT 60
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1 QAVVTQEPSLTVSPGGTVTLTCRSSTGAVTTSNYANWVQEKPGQAPRGLIGGTNKRAPWT 60
Qy 61 PARFSGSLLGGKAALTITGAQAEDEAEYYCVLWYSNLWVFGGGTKLTVL 109
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 61 PARFSGSLLGGKAALTITGAQAEDEAEYYCVLWYSNLWVFGGGTKLTVL 109
US-18-038-159-50
Filing date in PALM: 2023-05-22
Sequence 50, US/18038159
Publication No. US20240002540A1
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: KEYMED BIOSCIENCES CO., LTD
TITLE OF INVENTION: BISPECIFIC ANTIBODY AND USE THEREOF
FILE REFERENCE: 51426-0006US1
CURRENT APPLICATION NUMBER: US/18/038,159
CURRENT FILING DATE: 2023-05-22
NUMBER OF SEQ ID NOS: 95
SEQ ID NO 50
LENGTH: 125
TYPE: PRT
ORGANISM: Homo sapiens
Query Match 100.0%; Score 671; Length 125;
Best Local Similarity 100.0%;
Matches 125; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 EVQLVESGGGLVQPGGSLRLSCAASGFTFNTYAMNWVRKAPGKGLEWVGRIRSKYNNYAT 60
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1 EVQLVESGGGLVQPGGSLRLSCAASGFTFNTYAMNWVRKAPGKGLEWVGRIRSKYNNYAT 60
Qy 61 YYADSVKDRFTISRDDSKNSLYLQMNSLKTEDTAVYYCVRHGNFGNSYVSWFAYWGQGTL 120
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 61 YYADSVKDRFTISRDDSKNSLYLQMNSLKTEDTAVYYCVRHGNFGNSYVSWFAYWGQGTL 120
Qy 121 VTVSS 125
|||||
Db 121 VTVSS 125