Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/033,813

PROTEINS FOR THE DETECTION OF SCHISTOSOMA INFECTION

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Apr 26, 2023
Examiner
CHEONG, CHEOM-GIL
Art Unit
1645
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Merck Patent GmbH
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
65%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 65% of resolved cases
65%
Career Allow Rate
112 granted / 173 resolved
+4.7% vs TC avg
Strong +55% interview lift
Without
With
+54.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
204
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.8%
-37.2% vs TC avg
§103
24.4%
-15.6% vs TC avg
§102
15.4%
-24.6% vs TC avg
§112
36.4%
-3.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 173 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Claim Status Claims 1-13 were canceled. Claims 14-29 are pending and under consideration. Election/Restrictions Applicant's election with traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 12/1/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the elected invention in Group I features the use of a protein comprising SEQ ID NO: 1, which is the feature of the non-elected claims in Group II. Therefore, the claims could be examined together without imposing a serious search burden. This argument is found persuasive and the amended independent claims 14, 22 and 26 do not recite SEQ ID NO: 7 and SEQ ID NO: 5 which were cited as prior art in restriction requirement filed on 9/30/2025. Therefore, Restriction Requirement filed on 9/30/2025 has been withdrawn and all claims have been rejoined. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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 14-29 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. Independent claims 14, 22 and 26 recite “SEQ ID NO: 1”. Instant specification disclosed that SEQ ID NO: 1 corresponds to the minimal useful sequence from MS3_013701 and SEQ ID NO: 6 corresponds to the sequence of MS3_013701 (page 5; reproduced below). PNG media_image1.png 561 1099 media_image1.png Greyscale Therefore, SEQ ID NO: 1 is subset of SEQ ID NO: 6 according to instant specification. However, according to instant sequence listing, SEQ ID NO: 1 has 345 amino acids and SEQ ID NO: 6 has 225 amino acids. Therefore, SEQ ID NO: 1 cannot be subset of SEQ ID NO: 6. This is also supported by sequence alignment between SEQ ID NO: 1 and SEQ ID NO: 6 as shown below. SEQ ID NO: 1 and SEQ ID NO: 6 do not have any significant sequence similarity. Therefore, it is unclear if SEQ ID NO: 1 is the minimal useful sequence from MS3_013701 as disclosed by instant specification. Furthermore, claims 17-19 recite SEQ ID NO: 2-10. According to instant specification at page 5 as discussed above, SEQ ID NO: 2 must be subset of SEQ ID NO: 7. However, as shown below, SEQ ID NO: 2 and SEQ ID NO: 7 do not have any significant sequence similarity. Therefore, it is unclear if SEQ ID NO: 2 is the minimal useful sequence from Sh-TSP-2 and it is unclear if SEQ ID NO: 7 is the sequence of Sh-TSP-2. Likewise, according to instant specification at page 5 as discussed above, SEQ ID NO: 4 must be subset of SEQ ID NO: 9. However, as shown below, SEQ ID NO: 4 and SEQ ID NO: 9 do not have any significant sequence similarity. Therefore, it is unclear if SEQ ID NO: 4 is the minimal useful sequence from MS3_10385 as disclosed by instant specification and it is unclear if SEQ ID NO: 9 is the sequence of MS3_10385. Likewise, according to instant specification at page 5 as discussed above, SEQ ID NO: 5 must be subset of SEQ ID NO: 10. However, as shown below, SEQ ID NO: 5 and SEQ ID NO: 10 do not have any significant sequence similarity. Therefore, it is unclear if SEQ ID NO: 5 is the minimal useful sequence from MS3_10186 as disclosed by instant specification and it is unclear if SEQ ID NO: 10 is the sequence of MS3_10186. Sequence alignment between SEQ ID NO: 1 and SEQ ID NO: 6 PNG media_image2.png 308 1013 media_image2.png Greyscale Sequence alignment between SEQ ID NO: 2 and SEQ ID NO: 7 PNG media_image3.png 210 993 media_image3.png Greyscale Sequence alignment between SEQ ID NO: 3 and SEQ ID NO: 8 PNG media_image4.png 315 975 media_image4.png Greyscale Sequence alignment between SEQ ID NO: 4 and SEQ ID NO: 9 PNG media_image5.png 208 964 media_image5.png Greyscale Sequence alignment between SEQ ID NO: 5 and SEQ ID NO: 10 PNG media_image6.png 197 941 media_image6.png Greyscale Claim 17 recites “wherein (a) further comprises contacting said biological sample with a further protein having a sequence comprising a sequence chosen from the group consisting of SEQ ID NO: 1, SEQ ID NO: 2, SEQ ID NO: 3, SEQ ID NO: 4, SEQ ID NO: 5, SEQ ID NO: 6, SEQ ID NO: 7, SEQ ID NO: 8, SEQ ID NO: 9, and SEQ ID NO: 10.” Therefore, claim 17 encompasses a method wherein (a) further comprises contacting said biological sample with a further protein having a sequence comprising SEQ ID NO: 1. Because claim 17 recites “(a) further comprises contacting said biological sample with a further protein” and claim 14 already recited contacting said biological sample with a protein having sequence of SEQ ID NO: 1, it seems that Applicant intends that claim 17 recites (a) further comprises contacting said biological sample with a protein with SEQ ID NO different from SEQ ID NO: 1 already recited by claim 14. It is unclear how claim 17 further comprises contacting sample with a further protein of SEQ ID NO: 1 because step (a) of claim 14 already recited contacting sample with a protein of SEQ ID NO: 1. Dependent claims are also rejected because they depend from independent claims 14, 22 or 26, and therefore contain same claim limitation as independent claims 14, 22 or 26. Conclusion No claim is allowed. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHEOM-GIL CHEONG whose telephone number is (571)272-6251. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 5:00 pm. 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, Daniel Kolker can be reached at 571-272-3181. 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. /CHEOM-GIL CHEONG/Examiner, Art Unit 1645 /DANIEL E KOLKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1645
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 26, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 13, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12558408
INTRATUMORALLY INJECTED YEAST VACCINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12559536
CD33 SPECIFIC CHIMERIC ANTIGEN RECEPTORS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12540192
CD20 BINDING SINGLE DOMAIN ANTIBODIES
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12528877
BINDING MOLECULES TO CD38 AND PD-L1
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12516117
FULLY HUMAN ANTIBODY TARGETING CD19 AND APPLICATION THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 06, 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
65%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+54.9%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 173 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