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 .
DETAILED ACTION
1. Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1-6 and 8-20 are examined on the merits. Claim 7 is withdrawn from consideration.
2. Applicant's amendments to claims 1-2, 5-17 and 19-20 in the reply filed 4/23/2026 are acknowledged.
3. The rejections and objections not recited in this action are withdrawn.
Claim Objections
4. Claims 5-6 and 10 are objected to for containing non-elected species.
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.
5. Claim(s) 1-6 and 8-20 remain rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ngaki et al. (October 2020 Plant Biotechnol J. 19:502-516) further in view of Abbitt et al. (WO 2018/183878) and Bhattacharyya et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0194657).
The instant claims are drawn to a modified soybean plant comprising at least one targeted modification in an endogenous GmDR1 gene resulting in increased expression of the endogenous GmDR1 gene relative to a reference plant lacking the modification, wherein the targeted modification in the GmDR1 gene comprises an insertion comprising one or more12 nt ZmOCS enhancer consisting of SEQ ID NO: 184 and wherein the increased expression in the GmDR1 gene results in an improvement in pest or pathogen resistance in the modified soybean plant relative to the reference plant lacking the modification and wherein the endogenous GmDR1 gene comprises the DNA molecule set forth in SEQ ID NO: 762 or a nucleotide sequence at least 95% identical thereto; or wherein the pest is a spider mite or Fusarium virguliforme; or wherein the target modification is located within a GmDR1 promoter; or wherein the promoter is modified at position 421-460 of SEQ ID NO:764; or wherein the targeted modification in an endogenous GmDR1 gene comprises the modified GmDR1 gene of SEQ ID NO: 770 or an allelic variant thereof. Instant is also drawn to soybean meal or soybean part; or wherein the par the is a seed; or wherein the soybean meal has less mycotoxin. Instant claims are also drawn to DNA molecule comprising the modified endogenous soybean GmDR1 gene containing the targeted modification(s) in the endogenous GmDR1 gene set forth in claim 1 and at least 100 base pairs of adjoining endogenous soybean chromosomal DNA located centromere-proximal and telomere-proximal to the modified endogenous soybean GmDR1 gene. Instant claims are also drawn to a method for producing a soybean plant by crossing the modified soybean plant with itself or a second soybean plant.
Ngaki et al. disclose a modified soybean plant comprising at least one targeted modification in an endogenous GmDR1 gene resulting in increased expression of the endogenous GmDR1 gene relative to a reference plant lacking the modification (Summary-"GmDR1-overexpressedtransgenicsoybeanlines"; page 503,Col.2, para1-"GmDR1 transgenes were expressed among the F. virguliforme-resistant R1 progenies; but not among the SDS susceptible progenies(Figure 1e; Figure 2c).";Fig.1e; Fig. 3e), wherein the targeted modification in the GmDR1 gene comprises an insertion, replacement, and/or deletion of one or more nucleotides in the GmDR1gene (page 503, Col.1 para4-"To test this hypothesis, we fused GmDR1 to three infection-inducible promoters and created three fusion GmDR1 genes (Figure 9), and wherein the increase of expression in the GmDR1 gene results in an improvement in resistance to a pest or pathogen in the modified soybean plant relative to the reference plant lacking the modification (Summary-“Overexpression of the protein led to enhanced resistance against not only against F.virguliforme...We, therefore, name this protein as Glycine max disease resistance1 (GmDR1...defense pathways maybe one of the mechanisms involved in generating broad-spectrum resistance among the GmDR1-overexpressed transgenic soybean lines against two serious pathogens and two pests including spider mites, against which no known resistance genes have been identified in soybean and among the most other crop species; Fig.5). Ngaki et al. disclose the modification is located within GmDR1 promoter or 5’UTR or allelic variants thereof (page 503, col. 1, para 4, also Figure S1). Ngaki et al. disclose F. virguliforme produce phytotoxin to cause foliar SDS (page 503, col. 1 2nd para.)
Ngaki et al. do not teach ZmOCS enhancer of SEQ ID NO:184 being inserted into GmDR1 gene.
Abbitt et al. teach expression modulation element of SEQ ID NO: 36, which comprising instant SEQ ID NO:184 (see alignment below). Abbitt et al. teach EME is present within about 10- about 5000 bp from transcription start site and could be present 2x to 10x copies (the paragraph bridging pages 1-2). Abbitt et al. teach EME is inserted into the regulatory region to increase the expression of the gene (page 2, lines 17-23). Abbitt et al. teach EME is operably linked to a heterologous sequence that is a disease resistance gene (page 3, line 29).
Given that overexpression of GmDB1 produces disease resistant soybean plant, it would have been obvious to incorporate the enhancer of Abbitt et al. into the promoter region to further increase the expression of GmDB1 gene resulting in instant invention with reasonable expectation for success. One would have been motivated for performing such modification given the teaching of Abbitt et al. that EME (such as 2x to 10x copies) can be operably linked to a heterologous sequence that is a disease resistance gene.
Although the combined teachings do not teach mycotoxin is reduced in modified soybean plant, such feature would have been obviously exhibited given that the modified soybean plant is resistant to F. virguliforme which produce phytotoxin to cause foliar SDS.
Although the combined teachings do not teach the modified endogenous soybean GmDR1 gene containing the targeted modification(s) in the endogenous GmDR1 gene set forth in claim 1 and at least 100 base pairs of adjoining endogenous soybean chromosomal DNA located centromere-proximal and telomere-proximal to the modified endogenous soybean GmDR1 gene, such construct is merely considered as an obvious design choice.
It would also have been obvious to cross the modified soybean plant with itself or another soybean plant since it would be an obvious routine procedure for plant breeding to generate disease resistant soybean lines.
Although the combined teachings do not teach wherein the endogenous GmDR1 comprising SEQ ID NO: 762, such feature would have been obviously exhibited given the GmDR1 of the reference has the same gene name from the same plant species as instant GmDR1. Further Bhattacharyya et al. further teaches SEQ ID NO:17 that is 100% identical to instant
Although the combined teachings do not teach the promoter is modified at position 421-460 of SEQ ID NO:764, such construct is merely considered as an obvious design choice as enhancer can be located in any wherein upstream of the start site.
RESULT 3
US-16-498-447-36
(NOTE: this sequence has 3 duplicates in the database searched.
See complete list at the end of this report)
Sequence 36, 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 36
LENGTH: 13
TYPE: DNA
ORGANISM: Zea mays
Query Match 100.0%; Score 12; Length 13;
Best Local Similarity 100.0%;
Matches 12; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 GTAAGCGCTTAC 12
||||||||||||
Db 1 GTAAGCGCTTAC 12
Applicants traverse in the paper filed 4/23/2026. Applicants’ arguments have been fully considered but were not found persuasive.
Applicants argue that Abbitt teaches away from instant invention in that Abbitt showed that instant SEQ ID No:184 has the opposite function compared to instant invention (response, pages 12-14).
The Office contends that although it is true that Abbitt teaches away from instant invention, instant claim 1 recites an insertion comprising one or more 12 nucleotide ZmOCS enhancers consisting of SEQ ID NO:184 (emphasis added), which still reads on inserting one or more SEQ ID NO:36 of Abbitt into GmDR1 gene given the open language “comprising”. To overcome the rejection, it is suggested to replace “comprising” with –consisting of--.
Conclusion
No claim is allowed.
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). 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LI ZHENG whose telephone number is (571)272-8031. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (9-5).
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.
/LI ZHENG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1662
Prosecution Insights