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 .
Claims 17-34 are still at issue and are present for examination.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election without traverse of the invention of Group 1, claims 17-31, to a method of producing anthranilic acid, in the paper of 12/5/2025, is acknowledged.
Claims 32-34 are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37
CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Information Disclosure Statement
The listing of references in the specification is not a proper information disclosure statement. 37 CFR 1.98(b) requires a list of all patents, publications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office, and MPEP § 609 A(1) states, "the list may not be incorporated into the specification but must be submitted in a separate paper."
Applicants filing of information disclosure statements on 4/28/2023 and 1/12/2026 are acknowledged and have been considered.
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 17-31 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.
Claim 17 (claims 18-31 dependent on) recites the limitation " the non-modified bacterium ". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. While it is recognized that the claim recites “the non-modified bacterium corresponding to said recombinant bacterium” it is unclear as to exactly what the non-modified bacterium corresponding to said recombinant bacterium is. This indefiniteness is further based upon referencing a recombinant bacterium is a product by process type limitation. Thus the recitation “the non-modified bacterium” is indefinite.
Claim 17 (claims 18-31 dependent on) is further indefinite in the recitation “and
to decrease the ratio between anthranilate phosphoribosyltransferase activity and anthranilate synthase activity by comparison to the non- modified bacterium,” as it is unclear and confusing as to applicants intended meaning of the recitation in the context of the claim. In the interest of advancing prosecution the recitation is interpreted as “
Claim 30 is further indefinite in the recitation “wherein the recombinant bacterium is cultivated in a culture medium lacking tryptophan or any tryptophan source.” In that it is unclear and confusing as to how this further limits claim 17 from which it depends. Specifically it is unclear if applicants are attempting to further limit the claimed method such that recitation is a step of the method or are applicants further limiting the “recombinant bacterium” of the claimed method.
Appropriate correction and/or comment is required.
Closest Prior Art
US 2016060638 discloses how to enzymatically synthesize anthranilate in E. coli. US 2016060638 does not disclose or suggest a situation where TrpG and Trp D activities are both present and separately regulated to favor levels of TrpG
US 2017152535 discloses production of o-aminobenzoate via 2-aminobenzoic acid(=anthranilic acid) using an auxotroph when using E. coli. US 2017152535 does not clearly disclose a situation where TrpG and TrpD activities are both present in a species that naturally expresses these polypeptides together and separately regulated to favor levels of TrpG.
Remarks
No claim is allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD G HUTSON whose telephone number is (571)272-0930. The examiner can normally be reached 6-3 EST Mon-Fri.
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, Robert Mondesi can be reached at (408) 918-7584. 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.
rgh
2/2/2026
/RICHARD G HUTSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1652
Prosecution Insights