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 .
Status of claims
The applicant’s response filed 1/8/2026 has been entered.
Independent claim 17 has been amended, necessitating a new ground(s) of rejection.
Claims 1-16 had been canceled.
In summary, claims 17-29 are pending and examined in this office action.
All previous objections and rejections not set forth below have been withdrawn in view of the applicant’s amendment and/or upon further consideration. See “Response to Arguments” at the end of office action.
The following rejections are repeated, modified and/or added for the reasons of record as set forth in the last Office action of 10/10/2025, and/or necessitated by the applicant’s amendments. The applicant’s arguments filed 1/8/2026 have been thoroughly considered but are not deemed fully persuasive.
Interpretation of “an enhancer element comprising SEQ ID NO: 343, and wherein the enhancer element does not comprise SEQ ID NO: 341”
In the sequence listing of 12/10/2023:
SEQ ID NO: 341 is a 16 bp sequence: acgtaagcgcttacgt
SEQ ID NO: 343 is a 12 bp sequence: gtaagcgcttac
SEQ ID NO: 341 comprises SEQ ID NO: 343.
Accordingly, the claimed enhancer elements are a genus of sequences, which must comprise SEQ ID NO: 341, but cannot comprise SEQ ID NO: 341 (16 bases). They are 12 bp or longer (including very long sequences), and can be shorter or longer than 16 bases.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or non-obviousness.
Claims 17-22, 24-25, 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over each of Svitashev et al (Genome editing in maize directed by CRISPR–Cas9 ribonucleoprotein complexes. Nature communications, 1-7, 2016) and Jacobs et al (Targeted genome modifications in soybean with CRISPR/Cas9. BMC Biotechnology. 1-10, 2015), in view of Abbitt et al (US PGPUB 20210324401/US application 16498477, filed 9/27/2019, priority application 62479781 filed 03/31/2017).
Note: instant application was filed 2/10/2023, and instant SEQ ID NO: 343 was disclosed in provisional application 62510645, filed 5/24/2017. Abbitt et al (US PGPUB 20210324401) was field before, and the priority application 62479781 also was filed before, instant application. 62479781 disclosed reference SEQ ID NO: 5 (as one of 52 SEQ ID NOs) in the sequence listing. Also see “Sequence Matches” at the end of office action.
Thus, Abbitt et al is a valid prior art.
Amended claim 17 is drawn to a modified plant cell comprising a targeted modification in a first gene and a targeted modification in a second gene,
wherein the targeted modifications result in an increase in expression of the first gene and the second gene relative to a plant cell lacking the modifications,
wherein the targeted modifications result in an increase in expression of the first gene and the second gene relative to a plant cell lacking the modifications,
wherein the targeted modifications comprise an insertion of an enhancer element comprising SEQ ID NO: 343 (12 bp), and
wherein the enhancer element does not comprise SEQ ID NO: 341 (16 bp).
Svitashev et al teach using CRISPR-Cas9 system to make targeted modification and transformation of maize plant cells. The transgenes include gene of interest (ALS2 gene) and marker gene (MOPAT-DSRED gene) (p5, right col, methods). The targeted transformation was successful, and both transgenes were delivered into the maize cells and have increased expression in the maize cells (p2, right col, Results). Thus, Svitashev et al teach a modified plant/maize cell comprising a targeted modification in a first gene and a targeted modification in a second gene, wherein the targeted modifications result in an increase in expression of the first gene and the second gene relative to a plant cell lacking the modifications.
Svitashev et al further teach using multiple and separated promoters for the multiple genes (p5, right col, Methods).
The targeted modified plant of Svitashev et al was successfully regenerated to a plant comprising plant part (leaves) (p3, figure 2, left col, 2nd para, right col, 1st para).
Jacobs et al teach using CRISPR-Cas9 system to make targeted modification and transformation of soybean plant cells. The transgenes include gene of interest (HPH gene) and marker gene (nptII gene) (Methods in p7, left col, last para; whole right col). The targeted transformation was successful, and both transgenes were delivered into the soybean cells and have increased expression in the soybean cells (Results and discussion in p2, right col, figure 1; p3-6). Thus, Jacobs et al teach a modified plant/soybean cell comprising a targeted modification in a first gene and a targeted modification in a second gene, wherein the targeted modifications result in an increase in expression of the first gene and the second gene relative to a plant cell lacking the modifications.
Jacobs et al further teach using separated promoters including 35S promoter for the multiple genes (p7, left col, last para, whole right col, Methods).
Specifically, Jacobs et al teach that the 35S promoter comprises enhancers (p7, right col, 1st and 3rd paras).
The targeted modified plant of Jacobs et al was successfully regenerated to a T0 plant comprising plant part (roots) (p6, right col, 1st para, 4th para).
Thus, Svitashev et al and Jacobs et al teach the limitations of claim 17; Jacobs et al teach and demonstrated success of using a combination of promoter and enhancer in modifying plant cells,
except
the targeted modifications comprise an insertion of an enhancer element comprising SEQ ID NO: 343, and wherein the enhancer element does not comprise SEQ ID NO: 341.
Abbitt et al disclosed a 14 bp sequence comprising instant SEQ ID NO: 343 (100% match), and does not comprise instant SEQ ID NO: 341 (reference SEQ ID NO: 5, the SEQ ID NO: 5 was filed 03/31/2017). See “Sequence Matches” below.
Abbitt et al further teach that the truncated 14 bp EME2 (SEQ ID NO: 5) inserted in −50 of the TSS in the ZmGOS2 promoter significantly increased gene expression in plant cells than the other tested sequences in Table 5A ([0194]-[0195], Table 5). The 14 bp EME2 (SEQ ID NO: 5) also worked well with CaMV 35S promoter ([0197]). Thus, the 14 bp reference sequence comprising instant SEQ ID NO: 343 but not comprising instant SEQ ID NO: 341 had been taught and demonstrated as an enhancer element.
Abbitt et al claim using reference SEQ ID NO: 5 to modulate expression of gene of interest in plant cells (claims 1 and 11).
Regarding dependent claims, as analyzed above, Abbitt et al teach that the enhancer element is a part of the promoter region, the limitation of claim 18.
Abbitt et al teach that the particular enhancer element is located in a region -520 to -20 upstream of the UBI gene intron (Example 7 in [0200]), overlapping with the limitation of instant claim 19.
As analyzed above, Svitashev et al teach a targeted modified maize cell; Abbitt et al teach and demonstrated using the particular enhancer to target maize cell (Example 5, [0196]); Jacobs et al teach a targeted modified soybean cell. Abbitt et al claim using reference SEQ ID NO: 5 to modulate expression of gene of interest in maize and soybean cells (claims 16, 28 and 38). Thus, the limitations of instant claims 20-21 are taught by Svitashev et al, Jacobs et al and Abbitt et al.
Each of Svitashev et al and Jacobs et al teach targeted modified plant and plant parts; Abbitt et al teach, claim and demonstrated using the particular enhancer to targeted modify maize cell (Example 5, [0196], claims 1-6), the limitations of instant claims 22 and 24.
Each of Svitashev et al and Jacobs et al teach growing the targeted modified plants and modified plant cells, the limitations of instant claims 25 and 28.
An invention would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art if any teaching, suggestion or motivation in prior art leading the one to combine the teaching(s) or suggestion(s) of the cited references to arrive the claimed invention.
In this case, it would have been obvious to modify the invention of Svitashev et al or/and Jacobs et al, such that the targeted modifications comprise an insertion of an enhancer comprising SEQ ID NO: 343 (and not comprising SEQ ID NO: 341), in the promoter regions, as taught by Abbitt et al. One ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so, because such enhancer has proven activity of enhancing plant expressible gene(s), and works in combination with 35S promoter, as demonstrated by Abbitt et al. The expectation of success would have been high, because Jacobs et al demonstrated using the combination of enhancer and promoter to achieve targeted modification of multiple genes in plant, and the particular enhancer of Abbitt et al had been demonstrated to work well as a combination of promoters including 35S promoter in plants.
Therefore, the invention would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art.
Claims 23, 26-27 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Svitashev et al, Jacobs et al and Abbitt et al, as applied to claims 1, 22 and 28 above, and further in view of Carlson et al (AU 2011204287, published 8/30/2012, filed 1/7/2011).
The teachings of Svitashev et al, Jacobs et al and Abbitt et al as they are applied to claims 1, 22 and 28 are set forth previously herein and are incorporated by reference.
Claim 23 limits claim 22, wherein the plant is an inbred line or an F1 hybrid.
Claims 26-27 are drawn to a method comprising processing the plant of claim 22 or a part thereof into the product (seed meal, starch, sugar, silage, or oil), for manufacturing a processed plant product (preamble).
Claim 29 limits claim 28, wherein the product is seed meal.
Svitashev et al, Jacobs et al and Ellis et al do not explicitly teach producing F1 hybrid plant, growing a plant, processing a plant, and producing seed meal, the limitations of claims 23, 26-27 and 29.
Producing F1 hybrid plant, growing a plant, processing a plant, and producing seed meal, are routine methods taught in prior art.
For example, Carlson et al teach genetically modified plants including maize and soybean (Abstract, [0018]).
Relevantly, Carlson et al teach making inbred or F1 hybrid ([0139]), the limitation of instant claim 23.
Carlson et al teach a method of producing a plant product, the method comprises processing a plant or plant part thereof, and teach that the plant product is seed meal, and so on ([0148]), the limitations of instant claims 26-27, 29.
In this case, it would have been obvious to modify the invention of Svitashev et al and/or Jacobs et al in view of Abbitt et al, such that the invention further includes making inbred or F1 hybrid of the targeted modified plant, and includes making processed plant product/seed meal, as taught by Carlson et al. One ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so, because hybrid progeny, plant product, seed and seed meal are important plant products to make. Given that producing F1 hybrid plant, growing a plant, processing a plant, and producing seed meal, are routine, as taught by Carlson et al, the expectation of success would have been high.
Therefore, the dependent claims would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art.
Remarks
The terminal disclaimer filed 3/4/2025 was approved, overcoming the double patenting rejection to claims 17-20 and 22-29 against U.S. Patent 11603536 (claim 13 claims using SEQ ID NO: 343 in the method).
Response to Arguments
In view of the claim amendment, the rejection is newly made citing a new reference Abbitt et al, as analyzed above. Thus, the arguments to the previously rejection is not applicable.
Critically, Abbitt et al not only teach a sequence (14 bp) comprising SEQ ID NO: 343 (12 bp) but not comprising SEQ ID NO: 341 (16 bp) as an enhancer in combination with promoters, but demonstrated that such enhancer worked well with promoters to increase gene expression in a working example.
Regarding the argument that example 14 goes on to demonstrate the unpredictability of truncating or otherwise modifying an enhancer element. In contrast to SEQ ID NO: 343, a different truncated variant (SEQ ID NO: 342) failed to enhance gene expression in the same assay. This disparity between SEQ ID NO: 343 and SEQ ID NO: 342 demonstrates that not all variants retain activity, and one would not have been able to predict which variant, if any, would provide increased expression, Pursuant to MPEP 716.02(b), the evidence relied upon should establish "that the differences in results are in fact unexpected and unobvious and of both statistical and practical significance." Ex parte Gelles, 22 USPQ2d 1318, 1319 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1992) (Mere conclusions in appellants’ brief that the claimed polymer had an unexpectedly increased impact strength "are not entitled to the weight of conclusions accompanying the evidence, either in the specification or in a declaration."); Ex parte C, 27 USPQ2d 1492 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1992). In another word, the results demonstrated by the applicant must be both statistical and practical significant, and that they are in fact unexpected. In this case, such result can be considered statistical and practical significant, and unexpected.
In addition, even if the applicant can make such a showing, MPEP 716.02(c) provides that the evidence of unexpected results must be weighed against evidence supporting prima facie obviousness in making a final determination of the obviousness of the claimed invention. MPEP 716.02(c) directs the examiner to MPEP 716.01(d), which establishes that although the record may establish evidence of secondary considerations which are indicia of non-obviousness, the record may also establish such a strong case of obviousness that the objective evidence of non-obviousness is not sufficient to outweigh the evidence of obviousness. Newell Cos. v. Kenney Mfg. Co., 864 F.2d 757, 769, 9 USPQ2d 1417, 1427 (Fed. Cir. 1988), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 814 (1989); Richardson-Vicks, Inc., v. The Upjohn Co., 122 F.3d 1476, 1484, 44 USPQ2d 1181, 1187 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (showing of unexpected results and commercial success of claimed ibuprofen and pseudoephedrine combination in single tablet form, while supported by substantial evidence, held not to overcome strong prima facie case of obviousness). The showing, when made, must outweigh the rationale in support of a finding of prima facie obviousness provided in the 103 rejection(s). In another word, does the evidence outweigh the obviousness rationale? In this case, prior art demonstrated the specific result of increasing gene expression in plant and maize, thus, such instant result is deemed obvious in view of the result in prior art.
Furthermore, MPEP 716.02(d) provides that whether the unexpected results are the result of unexpectedly improved results or a property not taught by the prior art, the "objective evidence of non-obviousness must be commensurate in scope with the claims which the evidence is offered to support." In other words, the showing of unexpected results must be reviewed to see if the results occur over the entire claimed range. In re Clemens, 622 F.2d 1029, 1036, 206 USPQ 289, 296 (CCPA 1980). In another word, is the evidence commensurate with the scope of the claims? Critically, in this case, such results are achieved by using SEQ ID NO: 343, not a genus of sequences comprising SEQ ID NO: 343.
Sequence Matches
Against Instant SEQ ID NO: 343
RESULT 9
US-16-498-447-5
Sequence 5, US/16498447
Publication No. US20210324401A1
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc.
TITLE OF INVENTION: EXPRESSION MODULATING ELEMENTS AND USE THEREOF
FILE REFERENCE: 7243USP1
CURRENT APPLICATION NUMBER: US/16/498,447
CURRENT FILING DATE: 2019-09-27
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: 62/479,781
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2017-03-31
NUMBER OF SEQ ID NOS: 68
SEQ ID NO 5
LENGTH: 14
TYPE: DNA
ORGANISM: Zea mays
Query Match 100.0%; Score 12; Length 14;
Best Local Similarity 100.0%;
Matches 12; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 GTAAGCGCTTAC 12
||||||||||||
Db 2 GTAAGCGCTTAC 13
AAT43964
ID AAT43964 standard; DNA; 20 BP.
XX
AC AAT43964;
XX
DT 25-MAR-2003 (revised)
DT 30-JUL-1997 (first entry)
XX
DE Octopine synthase element recombinant DNA sequence Ti OCS.
XX
KW OCS; T-DNA; transcription activating element; TAE; Ti plasmid;
KW Ri plasmid; plant-expressible gene; ss.
XX
OS Agrobacterium tumefaciens.
XX
CC PN US5573932-A.
XX
CC PD 12-NOV-1996.
XX
CC PF 18-MAY-1990; 90US-00525897.
XX
PR 06-FEB-1987; 87US-00011614.
XX
CC PA (MYCO ) MYCOGEN PLANT SCI INC.
XX
CC PI Dennis E, Ellis JG, Bouchez D, Llewellyn DJ, Peacock WJ;
XX
DR WPI; 1996-517885/51.
XX
CC PT Recombinant DNA mols. for expression in plants - comprising plant
CC PT octopine synthase enhancer, promoter and structural gene.
XX
CC PS Claim 14; Col 40; 43pp; English.
XX
CC The present sequence is an example of generic DNA sequence (in AAT43962)
CC in claim 1 for the promoter sequence of octopine synthase (OCS), from the
CC upstream nontranscribed region of plant-expressible genes. This sequence
CC is capable of activating or increasing the transcription of nearby,
CC preferably downstream, plant expressible genes in recombinant DNA-
CC containing tissue of both monocotyledonous and dicotyledonous plants. The
CC generic sequence was derived from the sequences identified in the
CC promoter regions of ocs and six other T-DNA opine synthase genes from Ti
CC and Ri plasmids from Agrobacterium tumefaciens, and three plant viral
CC promoters from cauliflower mosaic virus, figwort mosaic virus and
CC carnation etched ring virus. This enhancer is capable of being bound by
CC an OCS transcription factor and displays the upper band binding pattern
CC characteristic of the wild-type ocs enhancer in gel retardation assays.
CC The DNA molecules are useful for facilitating genetic engineering of
CC plants to express novel phenotypes of economic or investigative value.
CC Levels of expression are increased by the enhancer. (Updated on 25-MAR-
CC 2003 to correct PF field.)
XX
SQ Sequence 20 BP; 7 A; 5 C; 4 G; 4 T; 0 U; 0 Other;
Query Match 100.0%; Score 12; Length 20;
Best Local Similarity 100.0%;
Matches 12; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 GTAAGCGCTTAC 12
||||||||||||
Db 5 GTAAGCGCTTAC 16
AAT43964/c
ID AAT43964 standard; DNA; 20 BP.
XX
AC AAT43964;
XX
DT 25-MAR-2003 (revised)
DT 30-JUL-1997 (first entry)
XX
DE Octopine synthase element recombinant DNA sequence Ti OCS.
XX
KW OCS; T-DNA; transcription activating element; TAE; Ti plasmid;
KW Ri plasmid; plant-expressible gene; ss.
XX
OS Agrobacterium tumefaciens.
XX
CC PN US5573932-A.
XX
CC PD 12-NOV-1996.
XX
CC PF 18-MAY-1990; 90US-00525897.
XX
PR 06-FEB-1987; 87US-00011614.
XX
CC PA (MYCO ) MYCOGEN PLANT SCI INC.
XX
CC PI Dennis E, Ellis JG, Bouchez D, Llewellyn DJ, Peacock WJ;
XX
DR WPI; 1996-517885/51.
XX
CC PT Recombinant DNA mols. for expression in plants - comprising plant
CC PT octopine synthase enhancer, promoter and structural gene.
XX
CC PS Claim 14; Col 40; 43pp; English.
XX
CC The present sequence is an example of generic DNA sequence (in AAT43962)
CC in claim 1 for the promoter sequence of octopine synthase (OCS), from the
CC upstream nontranscribed region of plant-expressible genes. This sequence
CC is capable of activating or increasing the transcription of nearby,
CC preferably downstream, plant expressible genes in recombinant DNA-
CC containing tissue of both monocotyledonous and dicotyledonous plants. The
CC generic sequence was derived from the sequences identified in the
CC promoter regions of ocs and six other T-DNA opine synthase genes from Ti
CC and Ri plasmids from Agrobacterium tumefaciens, and three plant viral
CC promoters from cauliflower mosaic virus, figwort mosaic virus and
CC carnation etched ring virus. This enhancer is capable of being bound by
CC an OCS transcription factor and displays the upper band binding pattern
CC characteristic of the wild-type ocs enhancer in gel retardation assays.
CC The DNA molecules are useful for facilitating genetic engineering of
CC plants to express novel phenotypes of economic or investigative value.
CC Levels of expression are increased by the enhancer. (Updated on 25-MAR-
CC 2003 to correct PF field.)
XX
SQ Sequence 20 BP; 7 A; 5 C; 4 G; 4 T; 0 U; 0 Other;
Query Match 100.0%; Score 12; Length 20;
Best Local Similarity 100.0%;
Matches 12; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 GTAAGCGCTTAC 12
||||||||||||
Db 16 GTAAGCGCTTAC 5
AAQ49159
ID AAQ49159 standard; DNA; 18 BP.
XX
AC AAQ49159;
XX
DT 25-MAR-2003 (revised)
DT 22-APR-1994 (first entry)
XX
DE Octopine synthase (OCS) enhancer (OTP binding site).
XX
KW Promoter; enhancer; actin; saccharose; expression; octopine;
KW resistance genes; crop protection; ss.
XX
OS Synthetic.
XX
CC PN DE4222407-C1.
XX
CC PD 07-OCT-1993.
XX
CC PF 08-JUL-1992; 92DE-04222407.
XX
PR 08-JUL-1992; 92DE-04222407.
XX
CC PA (PLAC ) MAX PLANCK GES FOERDERUNG WISSENSCHAFTEN.
XX
CC PI Maas C, Schell J, Steinbiss H;
XX
DR WPI; 1993-312675/40.
XX
CC PT Module-type plant promoter for increased gene expression - comprises DNA
CC PT from exon 1 of rice actin 1 gene, pref. DNA from intron 1 of maize
CC PT saccharose synthase gene and octopine synthase enhancer.
XX
CC PS Example 1; Page 3-4; 10pp; German.
XX
CC The OCS enhancer is used in the construct of a module-type plant promoter
CC that is efficiently expressed in plant cells. The promoter also comprises
CC the DNA from position +4 to +57 of exon 1 of the actin-1 gene and a DNA
CC sequence from intron 1 of the saccharose synthase gene). The promoter can
CC be used to control the expression of heterologous genes e.g. resistance
CC genes and is capable of expressing such genes at least ten fold higher
CC than when they are under the control of their native promoters; in some
CC cases the enhancement of expression is many thousand fold. (Updated on 25
CC -MAR-2003 to correct PN field.)
XX
SQ Sequence 18 BP; 5 A; 4 C; 4 G; 5 T; 0 U; 0 Other;
Query Match 100.0%; Score 12; Length 18;
Best Local Similarity 100.0%;
Matches 12; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 GTAAGCGCTTAC 12
||||||||||||
Db 4 GTAAGCGCTTAC 15
AAQ49159/c
ID AAQ49159 standard; DNA; 18 BP.
XX
AC AAQ49159;
XX
DT 25-MAR-2003 (revised)
DT 22-APR-1994 (first entry)
XX
DE Octopine synthase (OCS) enhancer (OTP binding site).
XX
KW Promoter; enhancer; actin; saccharose; expression; octopine;
KW resistance genes; crop protection; ss.
XX
OS Synthetic.
XX
CC PN DE4222407-C1.
XX
CC PD 07-OCT-1993.
XX
CC PF 08-JUL-1992; 92DE-04222407.
XX
PR 08-JUL-1992; 92DE-04222407.
XX
CC PA (PLAC ) MAX PLANCK GES FOERDERUNG WISSENSCHAFTEN.
XX
CC PI Maas C, Schell J, Steinbiss H;
XX
DR WPI; 1993-312675/40.
XX
CC PT Module-type plant promoter for increased gene expression - comprises DNA
CC PT from exon 1 of rice actin 1 gene, pref. DNA from intron 1 of maize
CC PT saccharose synthase gene and octopine synthase enhancer.
XX
CC PS Example 1; Page 3-4; 10pp; German.
XX
CC The OCS enhancer is used in the construct of a module-type plant promoter
CC that is efficiently expressed in plant cells. The promoter also comprises
CC the DNA from position +4 to +57 of exon 1 of the actin-1 gene and a DNA
CC sequence from intron 1 of the saccharose synthase gene). The promoter can
CC be used to control the expression of heterologous genes e.g. resistance
CC genes and is capable of expressing such genes at least ten fold higher
CC than when they are under the control of their native promoters; in some
CC cases the enhancement of expression is many thousand fold. (Updated on 25
CC -MAR-2003 to correct PN field.)
XX
SQ Sequence 18 BP; 5 A; 4 C; 4 G; 5 T; 0 U; 0 Other;
Query Match 100.0%; Score 12; Length 18;
Best Local Similarity 100.0%;
Matches 12; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 GTAAGCGCTTAC 12
||||||||||||
Db 15 GTAAGCGCTTAC 4
Against Instant SEQ ID NO: 341
AAH19655
(NOTE: this sequence has 27 duplicates in the database searched.
See complete list at the end of this report)
ID AAH19655 standard; DNA; 16 BP.
XX
AC AAH19655;
XX
DT 20-JUL-2001 (first entry)
XX
DE Plant octopine synthase gene 16 bp palindrome sequence.
XX
KW Plant; octopine synthase; enhancer; rpL34 promoter; tobacco;
KW gene expression; transgenic plant; ds.
XX
OS Plantae.
XX
CC PN WO200127297-A2.
XX
CC PD 19-APR-2001.
XX
CC PF 12-OCT-2000; 2000WO-US028111.
XX
PR 12-OCT-1999; 99US-00417019.
XX
CC PA (BATT ) BATTELLE MEMORIAL INST.
XX
CC PI Shi L, Dai Z, Gao J, Hooker BS, Anderson DB;
XX
DR WPI; 2001-290725/30.
XX
CC PT Novel enhancer elements for increasing the expression of a minimal
CC PT promoter e.g. mannopine synthase comprise 12, 26 and 16 bp sequences.
XX
CC PS Disclosure; Page 2; 48pp; English.
XX
CC The present sequence is provided in a specification relating to
CC synergistically functional, yet separable, cis-acting enhancer elements
CC from the rpL34 promoter. The enhancer elements can be used to increase
CC the level of expression of the promoter to which the elements are
CC operably linked. They are useful for increasing expression of a gene in a
CC cell. The vectors can be used to facilitate the expression and/or
CC secretion of heterologous proteins in a cell culture. The present
CC sequence is a cis-acting element that enhances transcription in plants
XX
SQ Sequence 16 BP; 4 A; 4 C; 4 G; 4 T; 0 U; 0 Other;
Query Match 100.0%; Score 16; Length 16;
Best Local Similarity 100.0%;
Matches 16; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 ACGTAAGCGCTTACGT 16
||||||||||||||||
Db 1 ACGTAAGCGCTTACGT 16
Conclusion
No claim is allowed.
The applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). The applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Contact information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WAYNE ZHONG whose telephone number is (571)270-0311. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am to 5:00pm 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, Bratislav Stankovic, can be reached on 571-270-0305. 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.
/Wayne Zhong/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1662