Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/028,180

IMMORTALIZED KERATINOCYTES, LENTIVIRUS FOR KERATINOCYTE IMMORTALIZATION, AND METHODS OF USE

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Mar 23, 2023
Examiner
O'NEILL, MARISOL ANN
Art Unit
1633
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Regents Of The University Of Minnesota
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
47%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 7m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 47% of resolved cases
47%
Career Allow Rate
8 granted / 17 resolved
-12.9% vs TC avg
Strong +75% interview lift
Without
With
+75.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
48
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.6%
-36.4% vs TC avg
§103
42.0%
+2.0% vs TC avg
§102
23.8%
-16.2% vs TC avg
§112
24.8%
-15.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 17 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Priority Acknowledgement is made that the instant application is a National Stage of International application No. PCT/US2021/051789 (filed 09/23/2021), which claims the benefits of US Provisional Application No. 63/082,253 (filed 09/23/2020). Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Group 1 (Claims 1-9), drawn to a replication competent lentiviral vector comprising a nucleic acid sequence encoding at least two proteins selected from hTERT, HPB16 E7, and HPB16 E6 and a promoter suitable for expression in a mammalian cell, in the reply filed on 01/05/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 10-13, 15, and 17-22 are withdrawn from consideration, as being directed to a non-elected invention. Claims 1-9 have been examined on the merits. Claim Objections Applicant is advised that should claims 3 be found allowable, claim 4 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)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. Claims 1-9 are 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 1 recites “the nucleic acid sequence of (i) is transcribed as a single transcript comprising the first protein-cleavable peptide or self-cleaving peptide - second protein”. This statement is unclear because it could be interpreted as requiring a first protein, a cleavable peptide or self-cleaving peptide, and a second protein or as requiring a first protein-cleavable peptide or self-cleaving peptide and a second protein. In the interest of compact prosecution, the claim is being interpreted as requiring a first protein, a cleavable peptide or self-cleaving peptide, and a second protein. Claims 2-9 depend from claim 1 and do not rectify the issue. Thus claims 2-9 inherit the deficiency. Further regarding claim 4: Claim 4 recites the limitation "the 2A peptide" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claim should be amended to either recite “the self-cleaving peptide is a 2A peptide” or change the dependency of the claim to depend from claim 3. Further regarding claim 5: Claim 5 recites the limitation "the virus" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claim should be amended to recite “the lentiviral vector”. Further regarding claim 6: Claim 6 recites the limitation "the recombinant lentivirus" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claim should be amended to recite “the replication competent lentiviral vector”. Relevant Prior Art Liu et al (CN107779474A), cited in IDS, disclose pCDH-CMV-E6-Furin-FMDV2A-E7-IRES-GFP-EF1-Puro, a lentiviral vector expressing HPV16 E6 protein, HPV16 E7 protein, and the self-cleavable sequences Furin and foot and mouth disease virus 2A (F2A) (See English translation pg. 2, first two paragraphs and step 4). The Furin and F2A sequences are located between the E6 and E7 proteins (See English translation, pg. 3 (3)).A CMV promoter drives expression of E6 and E7 proteins together with a fluorescent protein (See English translation, pg. 2, third paragraph). Liu et al further disclose transfecting esophageal epithelial cells with pCDH-CMV-E6-Furin-FMDV2A-E7-IRES-GFP-EF1-Puro lentiviral vector (See English translation, pg. 5, Step 8). Liu et al do not disclose a replication competent lentiviral vector. Kazi (Charles River, 2023) teaches rare recombination events within plasmic sequences used to generate lentiviral vectors pose a risk of creating a replication competent lentivirus. The presence of a replication competent lentivirus in vector batches increase the risk of insertional mutagenesis due to potential ongoing viral replication and multiple integrations into DNA (See Kazi, fourth paragraph). Due to the potential for pathogenicity, FDA guidelines require testing to exclude the presence of replication competent lentiviruses for use in gene therapy (See FDA, Testing of Retroviral Vector-Based Human Gene Therapy Products for Replication Competent Retrovirus During Product Manufacture and Patient Follow-up, Jan, 2020). Given that Kazi and FDA guidelines teach replication competent lentiviral vectors are pathogenic and can produce insertional mutations due to ongoing viral replication and multiple integrations into DNA, a person of ordinary skill in the art would not have been motivated to modify the lentiviral vector of Liu et al to produce a replication competent lentivirus. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARISOL A O'NEILL whose telephone number is (571)272-2490. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 - 5:00 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, Christopher Babic can be reached at (571) 272-8507. 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. /MARISOL ANN O'NEILL/ Examiner, Art Unit 1633 /ALLISON M FOX/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1633
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 23, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 03, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600987
COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR CIRCULAR RNA EXPRESSION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12582678
METHOD FOR TREATING PLEURAL EFFUSION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 2 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
47%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+75.0%)
3y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 17 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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