DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 1. The present application, filed on or after Ma rch 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Claim Objections 2 . Claims 33, 35 and 37-38 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 33 , line 2 : “ wherein amplification sites ” should be changed to “ wherein the amplification sites ” for more clarity Claim 35 : the wherein clause should be changed to “ wherein the break in the backbone comprises a break in the first strand compris ing [[ es ]] at least one missing a phosphodiester bond” for more clarity Claim 37: the wherein clause should be changed to “ wherein the break in the backbone comprises a break in the first strand compris ing [[ es ]] at least one missing non-naturally occurring backbone linkage” for more clarity Claim 38, line 1: “ wherein break in the backbone ” should be changed to “ wherein the break in the backbone ” for more clarity Appropriate correction is required . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 3 . 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 appl icant regards as his invention. 4. Claim 38 is 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 38, which depends from claim 33, recites “ wherein break in the backbone comprises at least one abasic site ” (emphasis added) . It is not clear how the “break” could possibly comprise “ at least one abasic site ” because: 1) “abasic site” is NOT a “break”, and 2) an “abasic site” can lead to a “break” only after further treatment such as “treatment with an endonuclease or other single-stranded cleaving enzyme, exposure to heat or alkali” (see paragraph [00137] of the specification as filed) . 5. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d): (d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), fourth paragraph: Subject to the [fifth paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA)], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. 6. Claim 38 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of th e claim upon which it depends. Claim 38 , which depends from claim 33 , recites “ wherein break in the backbone comprises at least one abasic site ” (emphasis added) . As discussed in the rejection under 35 USC 112(b) above, “abasic site” is NOT a “break” and would NOT lead to a “break” until further treatment such as “treatment with an endonuclease or other single-stranded cleaving enzyme, exposure to heat or alkali” (see paragraph [00137] of the specification as filed). Thus, claim 38 is of improper dependent form for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends (i.e., claim 33 requires a “break”, but the “at least one abasic site” as recited in claim 38 is NOT a “break”) . Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 7 . 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. 8 . 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 effec tive filing date of the claimed invention. 9 . Claims 33 , 35 - 37 , 39 and 41- 42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Xu et al. ( BioTechniques 2010, 48 : 409 - 412 , with 3 pages of Supplementary Material ). Regarding claim 33 Xu et al. teach a c omposition (e.g., a composition comprising DPePCR beads ) comprising an array of amplification sites (e.g., each DPePCR bead comprises an array of amplification sites ) , wherein the amplification sites comprise a plurality of clonal double-stranded amplicons, wherein each double-stranded amplicon (e.g., the Bce AI-digested , double-stranded amplicon fragment hybridized to the capping adaptor just prior to the ligation . S ee the circled double-stranded amplicon intermediate (just prior to ligation) shown in Figure 1D as reproduced below ) comprises a first strand (e.g., the strand from the Bce AI-digested fragment that is attached to the bead surface by its 5’-end and the corresponding strand from the capping adaptor to be ligated, wherein there is a break between these two single-stranded fragments to be ligated) attached to the surface of the amplification site by the 5 ’ end and comprising a break in the backbone, and a second strand (e.g., the strand from the Bce AI-digested fragment that is not attached to the bead surface ) that is not attached to the surface of the amplification site and comprises nucleotides that are complementary to and hybridized to nucleotides of the first strand, wherein the break in the backbone of the first strand is flanked on both sides by complementary nucleotides of the second strand (see Figure 1 and the corresponding paragraphs) . Regarding claim 3 5 The composition according to Xu et al., wherein the break in the backbone comprises a break in the first strand compris ing at least one missing a phosphodiester bond (see Figure 1D). Regarding claim 3 6 The composition according to Xu et al., wherein the first strand comprises non-naturally occurring backbone linkage (e.g., biotin-linkage to facilitate attachment to the strepavidin bead ) (see Figure 1). Regarding claim 3 7 The composition according to Xu et al., wherein the break in the backbone comprises a break in the first strand compris ing at least one missing non-naturally occurring backbone linkage (e.g., although the missing backbone linkage used by Xu et al. is a phosphodiester bond , a non-naturally occurring phosphorothioate bond may be used as an alternative). Regarding claim 3 9 The composition according to Xu et al., wherein the second strand is complementary to less than all nucleotides of the first strand (see Figure 1D). Regarding claim 41 The composition according to Xu et al., wherein the break in the backbone is located from 5 to 50 nucleotides (e.g., 13 nucleotides) from the attached 5 ’ end (see Figure 1 caption: “ The digestion left 13 bases on the forward ( Bce AI) strand …”). Regarding claim 42 The composition according to Xu et al., wherein the first strand comprises at least 5 nucleotides located 5 ’ of the break that are hybridized to the second strand (see Figure 1D, as well as the table listing all the sequences in the Supplementary Material ). Allowable Subject Matter 10. Claim s 34 and 40 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion 11 . No claim is currently allowed. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT KAIJIANG ZHANG whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-5207 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday - Friday, 8:30 am - 5 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Heather Calamita can be reached on FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-2876 . 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. /KAIJIANG ZHANG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1684