Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/029,995

POLYVINYL SULFONATE DETECTION AND REMOVAL FROM BIOMOLECULE COMPOSITIONS

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Apr 03, 2023
Examiner
HORLICK, KENNETH R
Art Unit
1681
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Amgen, Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
817 granted / 1035 resolved
+18.9% vs TC avg
Strong +15% interview lift
Without
With
+15.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
1059
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.3%
-34.7% vs TC avg
§103
38.4%
-1.6% vs TC avg
§102
6.5%
-33.5% vs TC avg
§112
15.2%
-24.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1035 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . ELECTION 2. Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 12/05/25 is acknowledged. 3. Claims 8, 10, 12, 15, 17-19, 22, 25-26, 28, and 30-37 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/05/25. 4. Applicant is reminded that upon the cancelation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. A request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a) must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.76 that identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i). OBJECTION 5. Claims 1-3, 5, and 7 are objected to because independent claim 1 uses incorrect capitalization in each of steps a) - f). Correction is required. NON-PRIOR ART REJECTION 6. 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 1-3, 5, and 7 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. Claims 1-3, 5, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the elements. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted elements are: the relation between the sample, the template DNA, and host cell DNA in independent claim 1. Without clarification, the purpose and function of the claimed method cannot be understood, because the disclosed method (Example 1 in the specification, for example) only applies with respect to specific types of a sample, a template DNA, and host cell DNA. For example, claim 1 does not recite any source of host cell DNA, so it cannot be determined what such DNA is present and where it came from. It is suggested that claim 1 be amended to clarify the nature of the sample, template DNA, and host cell DNA in accordance with the disclosed method. It is well settled in U.S. patent prosecution that while claims are to be read in light of the specification, limitations are not to be improperly read into the claims. These claims are further indefinite because it cannot be determined what is encompassed by steps d), e), and f) because there is no nexus between these generating, comparing, and identifying steps and the prior steps a) – c). Clarification is required as to how these steps are performed and accomplish their intended purpose. ALLOWABLE SUBJECT MATTER 7. Due to the severe indefiniteness issue discussed above, the current claims cannot be properly compared with the prior art. However, for the sake of completeness it is noted that no prior art has been found teaching or suggesting the method as disclosed in Example 1 of the specification in which a polyanionic PCR inhibitor such as PVS is quantitated indirectly by PCR, in the disclosed manner using a dilution series and a spiked exogenous control template DNA, in a sample comprising a biologic produced in cell culture, for the purpose of determining if the sample is suitable for accurate PCR detection of undesirable, contaminating residual host cell DNA in the sample by PCR, wherein a sufficient concentration of polyanionic PCR inhibitor in said sample would compromise accurate PCR detection of said residual host cell DNA in said sample. Zheng et al. (2019) teaches using qPCR to detect undesirable residual host cell DNA in samples comprising biopharmaceutical products. Zhang et al. (2010) teaches a quantitative method for measuring PVS impurities in biological samples, as it was known that PVS may interfere with enzyme activity and cause protein precipitation. Kontanis et al. (2006) teaches using qPCR efficiency as a means of detecting PCR inhibitors to identify problematic samples. No prior art has been found teaching or suggesting combining or modifying the teachings of these references in such a way as to achieve the disclosed method. CONCLUSION 8. Soto (US 2023/0400442) is made of record as a reference of interest. 9. No claims are allowable. 10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH R HORLICK whose telephone number is (571)272-0784. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Thurs. 8:30 - 6:30. 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, Gary Benzion can be reached at 571-272-0782. 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. 01/23/26 /KENNETH R HORLICK/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1681
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 03, 2023
Application Filed
Apr 03, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12584159
SEPARATION OF NUCLEIC ACID COMPONENT COMPOUNDS ON ZWITTERIONIC STATIONARY PHASES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577613
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR SELECTIVE DNA MULTIPLE DISPLACEMENT AMPLIFICATION OF A DNA MIXTURE;
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12576399
DEVICES AND METHODS FOR ANALYZING BIOLOGICAL SAMPLES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571048
FRET-BASED ANALYTES DETECTION AND RELATED METHODS AND SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12565674
METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR ANALYZING NUCLEIC ACID MOLECULES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 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
79%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+15.1%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1035 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