Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/193,522

BARRIERS INCLUDING CROSS-LINKED AMPHIPHILIC MOLECULES, AND METHODS OF MAKING THE SAME

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Mar 30, 2023
Examiner
BLAND, ALICIA
Art Unit
1759
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Illumina, Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
50%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
62%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 50% of resolved cases
50%
Career Allow Rate
347 granted / 700 resolved
-15.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
40 currently pending
Career history
740
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
45.2%
+5.2% vs TC avg
§102
18.9%
-21.1% vs TC avg
§112
21.7%
-18.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 700 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Species C, a barrier comprising a nanopore, alpha-hemolysin in the reply filed on 12/17/25 is acknowledged. Claims 6, 8, 10, 14-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/17/25. Species C is crosslinked via the interface coupling agent, which is claim 7. The subject matter of Claim 7 has been indicated as allowable below. Thus, Claim 5 was examined (crosslinking at the hydrophilic block) Priority The claims have a priority date of the filing of the provisional application: 3/31/22 Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/17/25, 11/9/23, 6/20/23 have been considered by the examiner. 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. Claim 3 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 3 recites the limitation "the first layer" and “the second layer”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 3 should depend from claim 2. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1-5, 9, 11-13, 16-19, 34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Wang (CN112831395A, English translation provided). Wang discloses cell membranes for nanopore sequencing (title). Example 2 discloses synthesizing a triblock copolymer PMOXA-PDMS-PMOXA (hydrophilic-hydrophobic-hydrophilic) wherein the endgroups of the hydrophilic blocks comprise a methacrylate group (page 7 of the translation). This forms the bilayer seen in Figure 1. The membrane crosslinks at the hydrophilic blocks. These triblock copolymers meet the claimed amphiphilic molecules of claim 1 (e.g. they have hydrophilic and hydrophobic groups), the crosslinking of claim 1, and, the membrane of figure 1 implicitly has a fluid on either side of it and thus meets the barrier of claim 1. Elements above thusly meet all elements of claim 1. The bilayer of Fig 1 is a first and second layer (“bi” indicates 2 layers), meeting claim 2, both layers are crosslinked in Fig 1, meeting claim 3. The blocks are implicitly coupled to each other, e.g. both ends of the hydrophobic block is directly attached (coupled) to hydrophilic blocks, as required by claim 4. They are crosslinked via the unsaturation at the endgroups of the hydrophilic blocks, as required by claim 5. They are triblocks (as discussed above), meeting claim 9, having a hydrophilic-hydrophobic-hydrophilic structure, meeting claim 11. The crosslinking is via a polymerization reaction, e.g. reacting the end methacrylate groups polymerizes the endgroups together, as required by claim 12, the methacrylate reaction is an allyl moiety, as required by claim 13. A nanopore test device is used (example 2 and fig 2) meeting the aperture requirements of claim 18. Elements above meet claims 19 and 34. 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 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 nonobviousness. Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Wang in view of Brown (WO 2021/111139, US 2023/0041418 is used as an Equivalent document for the citations below). Wang includes elements as set forth above. Wang adds a nanopore former such as hemolysin (see under Example 2, page 7) but does not disclose the use of alpha-hemolysin. Brown discloses methods of tethering complexes in amphiphilic layers (abstract). These layers are akin to Wang, e.g. they are assembled layers of amphiphilic molecules. Brown discloses the use of nanopores as a transmembrane pore [0281]. This is the same purpose as Wang, e.g. to insert a pore (opening) in the amphiphilic layer. Brown discloses alpha-hemolysin to be a known nanopore former [0289]. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention to include in Wang the use of alpha-hemolysin, as taught by Brown, since this is recognized in the art as suitable for the intended use there of, e.g. a known nanopore former. See Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945), wherein the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 7 is 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. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: A barrier between first and second fluids comprising amphiphilic molecules wherein the amphiphilic molecules comprise at least one hydrophobic block coupled to at least one hydrophilic block at an interface and are crosslinked at the interface, is not suggested or disclosed. Closest prior art includes Wang, as above, however Wang only suggests crosslinking at the hydrophilic or hydrophilic block, not at the interface where the blocks are coupled. Other close prior art includes US 2002/0037986 however these are also crosslinked via endgroups of the amphiphilic molecule. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALICIA BLAND whose telephone number is (571)272-2451. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:00 am -3:00 pm 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, Curt Mayes can be reached at 571-272-1234. 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. /ALICIA BLAND/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 30, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 13, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600825
POLYMER COMPOSITIONS AND BIOSURFACES COMPRISING THEM ON SENSORS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600845
PROPYLENE POLYMER COMPOSITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600898
MICROEMULSION COMPOSITION TO INCREASE INJECTIVITY OF WATER PRODUCED IN RESERVOIRS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12590191
LOW-ODOR SOFT PVC MATERIAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12577382
THERMOPLASTIC MATERIALS FOR USE IN SLURRY TRANSPORTATION PIPES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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
50%
Grant Probability
62%
With Interview (+11.9%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 700 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