DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
Status of the Application
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-16, 18-20, 22, and 23 are pending in the application.
Applicant’s preliminary amendment to the claims, filed May 21, 2026, is acknowledged. This listing of the claims replaces all prior versions and listings of the claims.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of the invention of Group I, pending claims 1-14 and 23, and election without traverse of the species insect is from the genus Drosophila in the reply filed May 21, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 15, 16, 18-20, and 22 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claims 1-14 and 23 are being examined on the merits with claims 8 and 9 being examined only to the extent the claims read on the elected subject matter.
Priority
This application is filed under 35 U.S.C. 371 as a national stage of international application PCT/AU2021/051483, filed December 13, 2021, which claims foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a-d) to Australian application no. 2020904672, filed December 15, 2020. A certified copy of the foreign priority document has been filed in this application on June 15, 2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on June 29, 2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS has been considered by the examiner.
Drawing Figures
According to 37 CFR 1.84(u):
(u) Numbering of views.
(1) The different views must be numbered in consecutive Arabic numerals, starting with 1, independent of the numbering of the sheets and, if possible, in the order in which they appear on the drawing sheet(s). Partial views intended to form one complete view, on one or several sheets, must be identified by the same number followed by a capital letter. View numbers must be preceded by the abbreviation "FIG." Where only a single view is used in an application to illustrate the claimed invention, it must not be numbered and the abbreviation "FIG." must not appear.
(2) Numbers and letters identifying the views must be simple and clear and must not be used in association with brackets, circles, or inverted commas. The view numbers must be larger than the numbers used for reference characters.
The drawings filed on June 15, 2023 are objected to because view numbers must be preceded by the abbreviation "FIG." Appropriate correction is required.
The drawings filed on June 15, 2023 are also objected to because the partial views of Figure 4 must be identified by the same number followed by a capital letter, e.g., FIG. 4A, FIG. 4B, and FIG. 4C. Appropriate correction is required.
A corrected drawing sheet in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) is required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification/Informalities
The use of the terms GenBank, Geneious, Invitrogen, New England Biolabs, BestGene, Genesee Scientific, Sigma Aldrich, and Thermo Scientific, which are trade names or marks used in commerce, has been noted in this application (paragraphs [0129], [0131]-[0138], and [0149]). The terms should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore the term should be capitalized wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term.
Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks.
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. The following title is suggested: ---Transgenic Insect Capable of Expressing an Active Laccase---.
Claim Objections
Claims 3, 4, and 6 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 3 is objected to for reciting “a sequence at least 80%, 85%, 90%, 95%, 97%, or 99% identical to SEQ ID NO: 1” and in the interest of improving claim form, it is suggested that the noted phrase be amended to recite “a sequence having at least 80%, 85%, 90%, 95%, 97%, or 99% sequence identity to SEQ ID NO: 1.”
Claim 4 is objected to for reciting “the laccase encoded by the heterologous nucleic acid is at least 80%, 85%, 90%, 95%, 97%, 99% or 100% identical to the laccase encoded by SEQ ID NO: 1” and in the interest of improving claim form, it is suggested that the noted phrase be amended to recite “the laccase encoded by the heterologous nucleic acid has an amino acid sequence having at least 80%, 85%, 90%, 95%, 97%, 99% or 100% sequence identity to the amino acid sequence encoded by SEQ ID NO: 1.”
Claim 6 is objected to for reciting “a sequence at least 80%, 85%, 90%, 95%, 97%, or 99% identical to larval cuticle protein 9” and in the interest of improving claim form, it is suggested that the noted phrase be amended to recite “a sequence having at least 80%, 85%, 90%, 95%, 97%, or 99% sequence identity to the signal peptide sequence of larval cuticle protein 9.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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.
Claims 6, 7, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 6 is indefinite in the recitation of “a sequence at least 80%, 85%, 90%, 95%, 97%, or 99% identical to larval cuticle protein 9” because it is unclear from the claims and the specification as to the reference sequence(s) of larval cuticle protein 9 for determining identity. In the interest of advancing prosecution, it is suggested that the claim be amended to recite a sequence for larval cuticle protein 9
Claim 7 recites the limitation “the short tubulin alpha promoter.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. In the interest of advancing prosecution, it is suggested that “the” be replaced with “a” in the noted phrase.
Claim 23 recites the limitation “the fungal laccase.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. In the interest of advancing prosecution, it is suggested that claim 23 be amended to depend from claim 2.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 10-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. Applicant’s attention is directed to the "Guidance for Determining Subject Matter Eligibility Of Claims Reciting Or Involving Laws of Nature, Natural Phenomena, & Natural Products”, released on December 16, 2014.
Claims 10 and 14
Claim Interpretation: Claim 10 is drawn to a laccase preparation comprising the transgenic insect of claim 1, or a portion thereof.
Claim 14 is drawn to the laccase preparation of claim 10, wherein the preparation does not comprise an added laccase mediator.
Given a broadest reasonable interpretation, the recited “portion” of “the transgenic insect of claim 1” is, for example, the laccase expressed by the transgenic insect of claim 1. In view of this interpretation, claims 10 and 14 are interpreted as a laccase preparation comprising the laccase expressed by the transgenic insect of claim 1. The recited “laccase” is unlimited and encompasses a laccase that corresponds to a naturally-occurring laccase. Given a broadest reasonable interpretation, claims 10 and 14 are interpreted as encompassing a naturally-occurring laccase.
Patent Eligibility Analysis Step 1: The claims are drawn to a composition of matter, which is one of the statutory categories of invention.
Patent Eligibility Analysis Step 2A Prong 1: The claims recite a naturally-occurring laccase, which is considered to be a law of nature or a natural phenomenon (a natural product). The laccase preparation of claims 10 and 14 is not considered to have markedly different characteristics from what occurs in nature, and is considered to be a “product of nature” exception. Accordingly, the laccase preparation of claims 10 and 14 is directed to a judicial exception.
Patent Eligibility Analysis Step 2A Prong 2: There are no additional elements recited in the claims beyond the judicial exception.
Patent Eligibility Analysis Step 2B: The claims only recite the product of nature, without more and do not include any additional elements that could add significantly more to the judicial exception.
Claims 11 and 12
Claim 11 is drawn to the laccase preparation of claim 10, wherein the transgenic insect is fully or partially dried.
Claim 12 is drawn to the laccase preparation of claim 10, wherein transgenic insect is in the form of a meal or a powder.
As stated above, the recited “portion” of “the transgenic insect of claim 1” is, for example, the laccase expressed by the transgenic insect of claim 1. In view of this interpretation, claims 11 and 12 are interpreted as a laccase preparation comprising the laccase expressed by the transgenic insect of claim 1, wherein the laccase is fully or partially dried (claim 11) or wherein the laccase is in the form of a meal or powder (claim 12). The recited “laccase” is unlimited and encompasses a laccase that corresponds to a naturally-occurring laccase. Given a broadest reasonable interpretation, claims 10 and 14 are interpreted as encompassing a naturally-occurring laccase.
Patent Eligibility Analysis Step 1: The claims are drawn to a composition of matter, which is one of the statutory categories of invention.
Patent Eligibility Analysis Step 2A Prong 1: The claims recite a naturally-occurring laccase, which is considered to be a law of nature or a natural phenomenon (a natural product). While claims 11 and 12 recite “fully or partially dried” and “in the form of a meal or a powder,” respectively, there is no evidence of record that the laccase expressed by the transgenic insect of claim 1, when fully or partially dried or when in the form of a meal or powder, has any characteristics (structural, functional, or otherwise) that are markedly different from the corresponding laccase in its natural state and it was well-known in the prior art that freeze-dried (i.e., lyophilized) enzymes can be stored in sealed containers without loss of activity (see, e.g., Puig et al., US 3,133,001, particularly column 1, lines 58-63; cited on the attached Form PTO-892). Thus, the claimed laccase preparation is not considered to have markedly different characteristics from what occurs in nature, and the system is considered to be a law of nature exception. Accordingly, the laccase preparation is directed to a judicial exception.
Patent Eligibility Analysis Step 2A Prong 2: There are no additional elements recited in the claims beyond the judicial exception.
Patent Eligibility Analysis Step 2B: The claims only recite the product of nature, without more and do not include any additional elements that could add significantly more to the judicial exception.
Claim 13
Claim 13 is drawn to the laccase preparation of claim 10, further comprising one or more of a preservative, anti-caking agent or surfactant.
As stated above, the recited “portion” of “the transgenic insect of claim 1” is, for example, the laccase expressed by the transgenic insect of claim 1. In view of this interpretation, claim 13 is interpreted as a laccase preparation comprising the laccase expressed by the transgenic insect of claim 1 and one or more of a preservative, anti-caking agent or surfactant. The recited “laccase” is unlimited and encompasses a laccase that corresponds to a naturally-occurring laccase, and the recited “preservative, anti-caking agent or surfactant” is unlimited and encompasses a naturally-occurring preservative, anti-caking agent or surfactant. Given a broadest reasonable interpretation, claim 13 is interpreted as encompassing a combination of a naturally-occurring laccase and a naturally-occurring preservative, anti-caking agent or surfactant.
Patent Eligibility Analysis Step 1: The claim is drawn to a composition of matter, which is one of the statutory categories of invention.
Patent Eligibility Analysis Step 2A Prong 1: The claims recite a laccase preparation, which is interpreted as encompassing a combination of naturally occurring components and is considered to be a law of nature or a natural phenomenon (a natural product). There is no evidence of record of a naturally occurring counterpart to the claimed preparation, so the preparation is compared to the individual components as they occur in nature (see MPEP 2106.04(c).II.A). There is no indication in the specification or evidence of record that the individual components have any characteristics (structural, functional, or otherwise) that are different from the corresponding individual components as each occurs in nature. Furthermore, there is no indication in the specification or evidence of record that combining these components changes the structure, function, or other properties of the naturally occurring components. In other words, the overall combination of components does not render the resulting preparation different from each of the individual components. Thus, the laccase preparation of claim 13 is not considered to have markedly different characteristics from what occurs in nature, and is considered to be a “product of nature” exception. Accordingly, the laccase preparation of claim 13 is directed to a judicial exception.
Patent Eligibility Analysis Step 2A Prong 2: There are no additional elements recited in the claim beyond the judicial exception.
Patent Eligibility Analysis Step 2B: The claim only recites the products of nature, without more and does not include any additional elements that could add significantly more to the judicial exception.
As such, the claims do not qualify as eligible subject matter. For these reasons the claim is rejected under section 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
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.
Claims 10-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Callisen et al. (WO 2014/090940 A1; cited on the attached Form PTO-892; hereafter “Callisen”).
Claims 10-14 are drawn to a laccase preparation comprising the transgenic insect of claim 1, or a portion thereof.
Given a broadest reasonable interpretation, the recited “portion” of “the transgenic insect of claim 1” is, for example, the laccase expressed by the transgenic insect of claim 1. In view of this interpretation, claim 10 is interpreted as a laccase preparation comprising the laccase expressed by the transgenic insect of claim 1.
Regarding instant claims 10 and 13, Callisen teaches a detergent composition comprising a surfactant and an oxidoreductase enzyme, which oxidoreductase enzyme is a laccase enzyme comprised by the enzyme classification EC 1.10.3.2 or any fragment derived therefrom exhibiting laccase activity (p. 37, lines 31-34).
Regarding instant claims 11 and 12, Callisen teaches the detergent composition is in the form of a regular or compact powder (p. 34, lines 13-15). The laccase of the detergent composition in the form of a regular or compact powder of Callisen is considered to be “fully or partially dried” and “in the form of…a powder.”
Regarding instant claim 14, Callisen teaches a mediator is optional (p. 4, lines 16-19).
Therefore, Callisen anticipates claims 10-14 as written.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 5, 8-10, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Salmon et al. (WO 2009/005564 A2; cited on Form PTO-892 filed February 25, 2026; hereafter “Salmon”).
Claims 1, 2, 5, 8, and 9 are drawn to a transgenic insect capable of expressing an active laccase, the insect comprising a heterologous nucleic acid encoding the laccase wherein the nucleic acid encoding the laccase is operably linked to a promoter.
Claims 10 and 14 are drawn to a laccase preparation comprising the transgenic insect of claim 1, or a portion thereof.
Regarding instant claim 1, Salmon teaches a host organism comprising nucleotide sequences encoding a combination of lignin hydrolysis enzymes including a nucleotide sequence encoding a laccase, wherein the enzyme is heterologous to the host organism, and wherein the host organism includes Drosophila melanogaster (paragraphs [0028] and [0252]). Salmon teaches the nucleotide sequence includes expression regulatory elements such as a promoter sequence (paragraph [0254]).
Regarding instant claim 2, Salmon teaches laccase is found in fungi (paragraph [0223]) and teaches various nucleic acid sequences encoding fungal laccase enzymes, e.g., nucleic acid sequence encoding the laccase enzyme of P. sanguineus (paragraph [00234]), which is a white rot fungus.
Regarding instant claim 5, Salmon teaches the nucleic acid sequence can be inserted into a vector and teaches vector components include a signal sequence (paragraph [0377]). Salmon teaches the encoded polypeptide can be produced as a fusion with an N-terminal signal sequence (paragraph [0378]).
Regarding instant claims 8 and 9, Salmon teaches the host organism includes Drosophila melanogaster (paragraph [0028]).
Regarding instant claim 10, Salmon teaches expressing the polypeptide-encoding nucleotide sequence (paragraph [0400]) and teaches the laccase of the host organism retains at least 75% of the enzymatic activity of wild-type (paragraph [0028]). Given a broadest reasonable interpretation, claim 10 encompasses Salmon’s Drosophila melanogaster expressing an active heterologous laccase.
Regarding instant claim 14, Salmon is silent regarding an “added laccase mediator” and it is presumed that Salmon does not add a laccase mediator to the Drosophila melanogaster host organism.
Therefore, Salmon anticipates claims 1, 2, 5, 8-10, and 14 as written.
Alternatively, in view of the cited teachings of Salmon, the transgenic insect and laccase preparation of claims 1, 2, 5, 8-10, and 14 would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date. One would have been motivated and expected success to make the transgenic insect and laccase preparation of claims 1, 2, 5, 8-10, and 14 because of the explicit teachings of Salmon set forth above.
Therefore, claims 1, 2, 5, 8-10, and 14 are anticipated by or, in the alternative, are obvious in view of Salmon.
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.
Claims 3, 4, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salmon in view of Colao et al. (Microbial Cell Factories 5:31, 2006, 11 pages; cited on the attached Form PTO-892; hereafter “Colao”) as evidenced by GenBank Database Accession Number AJ294820 (November 2006, 3 pages; cited on the attached Form PTO-892; hereafter “GenBank AJ294820”).
Claim 3 is drawn to the transgenic insect of claim 1, wherein the heterologous nucleic acid comprises SEQ ID NO: 1 or a sequence at least 80%, 85%, 90%, 95%, 97%, or 99% identical to SEQ ID NO: 1.
Claim 4 is drawn to the transgenic insect of claim 1, wherein the laccase encoded by the heterologous nucleic acid is at least 80%, 85%, 90%, 95%, 97%, 99% or 100% identical to the laccase encoded by SEQ ID NO: 1.
Claim 23 is drawn to the transgenic insect of claim 1, wherein the fungal laccase is T. trogii laccase.
The relevant teachings of Salmon as applied to claims 1, 2, 5, 8-10, and 14 are set forth above.
Regarding instant claims 3, 4, and 23, Salmon does not teach or suggest a heterologous nucleic acid and laccase as recited in claims 3, 4, and 23.
Colao teaches a laccase encoded by lcc1 gene of T. trogii and heterologous expression of lcc1 in a methylotrophic yeast (Abstract). Colao does not teach the nucleotide sequence of lcc1 gene of T. trogii, however, evidentiary reference GenBank AJ294820 is cited to show that lcc1 gene of T. trogii is identical to instant SEQ ID NO: 1 (see Appendix for sequence alignment).
In view of the combined teachings of Salmon and Colao, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use the lcc1 gene of T. trogii for the nucleotide sequence encoding a laccase of Salmon. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated and expected success to use the lcc1 gene of T. trogii for the nucleotide sequence encoding a laccase of Salmon because Salmon taught the host organism comprises a nucleotide sequence encoding a laccase and Colao taught a nucleotide sequence encoding a laccase.
Therefore, the transgenic organism of claims 3, 4, and 23 would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salmon in view of Summers, M. (US Patent No. 5,155,037; cited on the attached Form PTO-892; hereafter “Summers”) and UniProt Database Accession Number P82384 (October 2020, 2 pages; cited on the attached Form PTO-892; hereafter “UniProt P82384”).
Claim 6 is drawn to the transgenic insect of claim 1, the transgenic insect of claim 5, wherein the signal peptide is larval cuticle protein 9 signal peptide, or a sequence at least 80%, 85%, 90%, 95%, 97%, or 99% identical to larval cuticle protein 9.
The relevant teachings of Salmon as applied to claims 1, 2, 5, 8-10, and 14 are set forth above.
Regarding instant claim 6, Salmon does not teach or suggest larval cuticle protein 9 signal peptide.
Summers teaches signal peptide sequences from insect cell secreted proteins for secretion of foreign genes in insect systems (Abstract). Summers teaches an exemplary insect signal sequence is the sequence encoding for Drosophila cuticle proteins (column 5, lines 16-17).
UniProt P82384 teaches the amino acid sequence of Drosophila melanogaster larval cuticle protein 9 and teaches the signal peptide at amino acids 1-16 (p. 2, bottom).
In view of the combined teachings of Salmon, Summers, and UniProt P82384, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use the signal peptide of Drosophila melanogaster larval cuticle protein 9 for the signal sequence of Salmon. One would have been motivated and expected success to do this because Salmon taught the host organism is Drosophila melanogaster and taught the laccase can be produced as a fusion with an N-terminal signal sequence, Summers taught the signal sequence for Drosophila cuticle proteins for secretion of foreign proteins in insect systems, and UniProt P82384 taught the signal peptide of Drosophila melanogaster larval cuticle protein 9.
Therefore, the transgenic organism of claim 6 would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salmon in view of Waters et al. (Sci. Rep. 8:13125, 2018, 14 pages; cited on the attached Form PTO-892; hereafter “Waters”).
Claim 7 is drawn to the transgenic insect of claim 1, wherein the promoter is the short tubulin alpha promoter.
The relevant teachings of Salmon as applied to claims 1, 2, 5, 8-10, and 14 are set forth above.
Regarding instant claim 7, Salmon does not teach or suggest a short tubulin alpha promoter as recited in claim 7.
Waters teaches four different promoters for expressing a heterologous protein in Drosophila melanogaster including pαTubulin-84b-Short, abbreviated as “ST” (p. 7, bottom). Promoter pαTubulin-84b-Short of Waters is considered to be encompassed by “the short tubulin alpha promoter” in claim 7.
In view of the combined teachings of Salmon and Waters, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use pαTubulin-84b-Short for the promoter of Salmon. One would have been motivated and expected success to do this because Salmon taught the host organism is Drosophila melanogaster and taught the nucleotide sequence encoding a heterologous laccase includes a promoter sequence, and Waters taught a promoter for expressing a heterologous protein in Drosophila melanogaster.
Therefore, the transgenic organism of claim 7 would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
Conclusion
Status of the claims:
Claims 1-16, 18-20, 22, and 23 are pending in the application.
Claims 15, 16, 18-20, and 22 are withdrawn from consideration.
Claims 1-14 and 23 are rejected.
No claim is in condition for allowance.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID J STEADMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-0942. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 7:30 AM to 4:00 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, MANJUNATH N. RAO can be reached on 571-272-0939. 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.
/David Steadman/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1656
APPENDIX
LOCUS AJ294820 2431 bp DNA linear PLN 14-NOV-2006
DEFINITION Trametes trogii lcc1 gene for laccase, exons 1-11.
ACCESSION AJ294820
VERSION AJ294820.1
KEYWORDS laccase; lcc1 gene.
SOURCE Coriolopsis trogii
ORGANISM Coriolopsis trogii
Eukaryota; Fungi; Dikarya; Basidiomycota; Agaricomycotina;
Agaricomycetes; Polyporales; Polyporaceae; Coriolopsis.
REFERENCE 1
AUTHORS Colao,M.Ch., Garzillo,A.M., Buonocore,V., Schiesser,A. and Ruzzi,M.
TITLE Primary structure and transcription analysis of a laccase-encoding
gene from the basidiomycete Trametes trogii
JOURNAL Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 63 (2), 153-158 (2003)
PUBMED 13680201
REFERENCE 2 (bases 1 to 2431)
AUTHORS Colao,M.C.
TITLE Direct Submission
JOURNAL Submitted (26-SEP-2000) Colao M.C., Department of Agrobiology and
Agrochemistry, University of Viterbo, via S. Camillo de Lellis snc,
01100 Viterbo, ITALY
FEATURES Location/Qualifiers
source 1..2431
/organism="Coriolopsis trogii"
/mol_type="genomic DNA"
/strain="201 (DSM 11919)"
/db_xref="taxon:76130"
gene 307..2407
/gene="lcc1"
CDS join(307..489,541..609,661..781,844..957,1010..1073,
1135..1227,1282..1438,1492..1689,1744..1800,1852..2058,
2117..2407)
/gene="lcc1"
/codon_start=1
/product="laccase"
/protein_id="CAC13040.1"
/db_xref="GOA:Q9HDQ0"
/db_xref="InterPro:IPR001117"
/db_xref="InterPro:IPR002355"
/db_xref="InterPro:IPR008972"
/db_xref="InterPro:IPR011706"
/db_xref="InterPro:IPR011707"
/db_xref="PDB:2HRG"
/db_xref="PDB:2HRH"
/db_xref="UniProtKB/TrEMBL:Q9HDQ0"
/translation="MARFQSLLTFITLSLVASVYAAIGPVADLTISNGAVSPDGFSRQ
AILVNDVFPSPLITGNKGDRFQLNVIDNMTNHTMLKSTSIHWHGFFQHGTNWADGPAF
VNQCPISTGHAFLYDFQVPDQAGTFWYHSHLSTQYCDGLRGPIVVYDPQDPHKSLYDV
DDDSTVITLADWYHLAAKVGSPVPTADATLINGLGRSIDTLNADLAVITVTKGKRYRF
RLVSLSCDPNHVFSIDGHSLTVIEADSVNLKPQTVDSIQIFAAQRYSFVLNADQDVGN
YWIRALPNSGTRNFDGGVNSAILRYDGAAPVEPTTSQTPSTNPLVESALTTLEGTAAP
GSPAPGGVDLALNMAFGFAGGKFTINGASFTPPTVPVLLQILSGAQSAQDLLPSGSVY
SLPANADIEISLPATAAAPGFPHPFHLHGHTFAVVRSAGSSTYNYENPVYRDVVSTGS
PGDNVTIRFRTDNPGPWFLHCHIDFHLEAGFAVVMAEDIPEVAATNPVPQAWSDLCPT
YDALSPDDQ"
sig_peptide 307..369
/gene="lcc1"
mat_peptide join(370..489,541..609,661..781,844..957,1010..1073,
1135..1227,1282..1438,1492..1689,1744..1800,1852..2058,
2117..2404)
/gene="lcc1"
/product="Pox L3"
exon 307..489
/gene="lcc1"
/number=1
intron 490..540
/gene="lcc1"
/number=1
exon 541..609
/gene="lcc1"
/number=2
intron 610..660
/gene="lcc1"
/number=2
exon 661..781
/gene="lcc1"
/number=3
intron 782..843
/gene="lcc1"
/number=3
exon 844..957
/gene="lcc1"
/number=4
intron 958..1009
/gene="lcc1"
/number=4
exon 1010..1073
/gene="lcc1"
/number=5
intron 1074..1134
/gene="lcc1"
/number=5
exon 1135..1227
/gene="lcc1"
/number=6
intron 1228..1281
/gene="lcc1"
/number=6
exon 1282..1438
/gene="lcc1"
/number=7
intron 1439..1491
/gene="lcc1"
/number=7
exon 1492..1689
/gene="lcc1"
/number=8
intron 1690..1743
/gene="lcc1"
/number=8
exon 1744..1800
/gene="lcc1"
/number=9
intron 1801..1851
/gene="lcc1"
/number=9
exon 1852..2058
/gene="lcc1"
/number=10
intron 2059..2116
/gene="lcc1"
/number=10
exon 2117..2407
/gene="lcc1"
/number=11
ORIGIN
Query Match 100.0%; Score 2101; Length 2431;
Best Local Similarity 100.0%;
Matches 2101; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 ATGGCCAGGTTCCAATCTCTCCTCACCTTCATCACCCTCTCGCTCGTTGCCTCCGTGTAC 60
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 307 ATGGCCAGGTTCCAATCTCTCCTCACCTTCATCACCCTCTCGCTCGTTGCCTCCGTGTAC 366
Qy 61 GCTGCCATCGGGCCAGTCGCAGACCTCACCATCTCCAATGGTGCCGTCAGTCCCGATGGT 120
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 367 GCTGCCATCGGGCCAGTCGCAGACCTCACCATCTCCAATGGTGCCGTCAGTCCCGATGGT 426
Qy 121 TTCTCTCGGCAGGCGATCCTGGTCAACGACGTCTTCCCCAGTCCCCTCATCACGGGTAAC 180
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 427 TTCTCTCGGCAGGCGATCCTGGTCAACGACGTCTTCCCCAGTCCCCTCATCACGGGTAAC 486
Qy 181 AAGGCCAGTTGTTTTCTCCATCGCCGTTCACCGCACATGCTGACCTACTTACAGGGTGAT 240
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 487 AAGGCCAGTTGTTTTCTCCATCGCCGTTCACCGCACATGCTGACCTACTTACAGGGTGAT 546
Qy 241 CGCTTCCAACTCAACGTCATCGACAACATGACGAACCACACCATGTTGAAGTCTACTAGT 300
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 547 CGCTTCCAACTCAACGTCATCGACAACATGACGAACCACACCATGTTGAAGTCTACTAGT 606
Qy 301 ATCGTGAGTACCTCGGCGTACTGTCCGATTTACCGCTCACATTGCTCCTTTCAGCACTGG 360
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 607 ATCGTGAGTACCTCGGCGTACTGTCCGATTTACCGCTCACATTGCTCCTTTCAGCACTGG 666
Qy 361 CACGGCTTCTTCCAACACGGTACGAACTGGGCCGATGGCCCCGCCTTCGTCAACCAGTGC 420
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 667 CACGGCTTCTTCCAACACGGTACGAACTGGGCCGATGGCCCCGCCTTCGTCAACCAGTGC 726
Qy 421 CCCATTTCTACCGGGCATGCGTTCCTTTACGACTTCCAGGTCCCTGACCAAGCTGGCGAG 480
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 727 CCCATTTCTACCGGGCATGCGTTCCTTTACGACTTCCAGGTCCCTGACCAAGCTGGCGAG 786
Qy 481 TTGCAAACGATATATGGCTGACGAACAAAGTCCGGTGCTAATAGCCTACTGCAATAGGTA 540
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 787 TTGCAAACGATATATGGCTGACGAACAAAGTCCGGTGCTAATAGCCTACTGCAATAGGTA 846
Qy 541 CTTTCTGGTACCACAGTCACTTGTCCACTCAGTACTGTGATGGTCTCAGGGGTCCGATTG 600
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 847 CTTTCTGGTACCACAGTCACTTGTCCACTCAGTACTGTGATGGTCTCAGGGGTCCGATTG 906
Qy 601 TTGTCTATGACCCTCAAGACCCCCACAAGAGCCTCTACGACGTTGATGACGGTAATGCCA 660
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 907 TTGTCTATGACCCTCAAGACCCCCACAAGAGCCTCTACGACGTTGATGACGGTAATGCCA 966
Qy 661 TTGATACTGGAGTCTTTGCGAATGCTAACATGTTTTCTTGCAGACTCCACTGTGATCACT 720
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 967 TTGATACTGGAGTCTTTGCGAATGCTAACATGTTTTCTTGCAGACTCCACTGTGATCACT 1026
Qy 721 CTCGCGGACTGGTACCACTTAGCTGCCAAAGTTGGCTCGCCTGTCCCGTGAGTCTATTTC 780
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1027 CTCGCGGACTGGTACCACTTAGCTGCCAAAGTTGGCTCGCCTGTCCCGTGAGTCTATTTC 1086
Qy 781 GTCTGGAGAATACTCTATTTTTGCTGACATCCAGTCATGTTCTCACAGGACTGCAGACGC 840
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1087 GTCTGGAGAATACTCTATTTTTGCTGACATCCAGTCATGTTCTCACAGGACTGCAGACGC 1146
Qy 841 GACTCTCATCAACGGCCTCGGTCGCAGCATCGACACGCTCAACGCCGATTTGGCTGTCAT 900
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1147 GACTCTCATCAACGGCCTCGGTCGCAGCATCGACACGCTCAACGCCGATTTGGCTGTCAT 1206
Qy 901 CACGGTCACGAAGGGCAAGCGGTACGTGTCCAACCCAGAGGTCAAAATGCGGGTATCCTA 960
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1207 CACGGTCACGAAGGGCAAGCGGTACGTGTCCAACCCAGAGGTCAAAATGCGGGTATCCTA 1266
Qy 961 ATGAACGTCATGTAGCTATCGCTTCCGCCTTGTGTCCCTTTCATGCGACCCGAACCACGT 1020
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1267 ATGAACGTCATGTAGCTATCGCTTCCGCCTTGTGTCCCTTTCATGCGACCCGAACCACGT 1326
Qy 1021 GTTCAGTATTGACGGTCACTCTCTGACCGTTATCGAGGCAGACAGCGTGAACCTGAAGCC 1080
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1327 GTTCAGTATTGACGGTCACTCTCTGACCGTTATCGAGGCAGACAGCGTGAACCTGAAGCC 1386
Qy 1081 CCAGACTGTCGACTCCATCCAGATCTTCGCCGCCCAGCGGTACTCGTTTGTAGTAGGTTG 1140
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1387 CCAGACTGTCGACTCCATCCAGATCTTCGCCGCCCAGCGGTACTCGTTTGTAGTAGGTTG 1446
Qy 1141 GACACGGCTTCAACAGGCGTGCATGTCGCTCACCCACTGTCATAGCTAAATGCAGATCAG 1200
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1447 GACACGGCTTCAACAGGCGTGCATGTCGCTCACCCACTGTCATAGCTAAATGCAGATCAG 1506
Qy 1201 GATGTGGGCAACTACTGGATCCGCGCCCTGCCCAACTCCGGAACCAGGAACTTCGACGGT 1260
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1507 GATGTGGGCAACTACTGGATCCGCGCCCTGCCCAACTCCGGAACCAGGAACTTCGACGGT 1566
Qy 1261 GGGGTCAACTCCGCCATCCTCCGCTACGACGGTGCTGCGCCTGTTGAGCCCACAACGTCT 1320
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1567 GGGGTCAACTCCGCCATCCTCCGCTACGACGGTGCTGCGCCTGTTGAGCCCACAACGTCT 1626
Qy 1321 CAGACGCCGTCGACGAATCCTTTGGTGGAGTCCGCCCTCACTACTCTCGAAGGCACCGCT 1380
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1627 CAGACGCCGTCGACGAATCCTTTGGTGGAGTCCGCCCTCACTACTCTCGAAGGCACCGCT 1686
Qy 1381 GCAGTATGTGATCTGCGGACGAACAACCGAGCGCTGTCTACCTATCGCATTGTCTAGCCC 1440
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1687 GCAGTATGTGATCTGCGGACGAACAACCGAGCGCTGTCTACCTATCGCATTGTCTAGCCC 1746
Qy 1441 GGCAGCCCGGCTCCTGGCGGTGTCGACCTAGCGCTCAACATGGCGTTTGGCTTCGTAAGT 1500
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1747 GGCAGCCCGGCTCCTGGCGGTGTCGACCTAGCGCTCAACATGGCGTTTGGCTTCGTAAGT 1806
Qy 1501 CGCGCCCCTGTTAAGTACACAGCACATGGCTCATCATCGTTTCAGGCCGGCGGCAAATTC 1560
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1807 CGCGCCCCTGTTAAGTACACAGCACATGGCTCATCATCGTTTCAGGCCGGCGGCAAATTC 1866
Qy 1561 ACCATCAACGGCGCGAGCTTTACCCCTCCCACAGTCCCTGTCCTCCTGCAGATCCTGAGC 1620
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1867 ACCATCAACGGCGCGAGCTTTACCCCTCCCACAGTCCCTGTCCTCCTGCAGATCCTGAGC 1926
Qy 1621 GGCGCGCAGTCGGCGCAGGACCTCCTACCCTCCGGAAGTGTATACTCGCTCCCTGCGAAC 1680
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1927 GGCGCGCAGTCGGCGCAGGACCTCCTACCCTCCGGAAGTGTATACTCGCTCCCTGCGAAC 1986
Qy 1681 GCGGACATTGAGATATCCCTGCCCGCCACCGCCGCCGCCCCTGGCTTCCCGCACCCCTTC 1740
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1987 GCGGACATTGAGATATCCCTGCCCGCCACCGCCGCCGCCCCTGGCTTCCCGCACCCCTTC 2046
Qy 1741 CATTTGCACGGGGTACGTCTCACCGGCCCCTCCTAACGCCCTCACGCTGACCTCCTATTC 1800
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 2047 CATTTGCACGGGGTACGTCTCACCGGCCCCTCCTAACGCCCTCACGCTGACCTCCTATTC 2106
Qy 1801 CACCCAATAGCACACCTTCGCCGTCGTGCGCAGCGCGGGCTCGTCCACGTACAACTACGA 1860
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 2107 CACCCAATAGCACACCTTCGCCGTCGTGCGCAGCGCGGGCTCGTCCACGTACAACTACGA 2166
Qy 1861 GAACCCGGTCTACCGCGATGTGGTCAGCACCGGCTCGCCCGGGGACAACGTCACGATCCG 1920
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 2167 GAACCCGGTCTACCGCGATGTGGTCAGCACCGGCTCGCCCGGGGACAACGTCACGATCCG 2226
Qy 1921 GTTCCGGACGGACAACCCCGGCCCGTGGTTCCTCCACTGCCATATCGACTTCCACCTCGA 1980
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 2227 GTTCCGGACGGACAACCCCGGCCCGTGGTTCCTCCACTGCCATATCGACTTCCACCTCGA 2286
Qy 1981 GGCGGGCTTTGCGGTCGTCATGGCCGAGGACATTCCCGAGGTCGCTGCTACGAACCCGGT 2040
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 2287 GGCGGGCTTTGCGGTCGTCATGGCCGAGGACATTCCCGAGGTCGCTGCTACGAACCCGGT 2346
Qy 2041 CCCGCAGGCATGGTCGGACCTGTGCCCGACTTACGACGCGCTCTCGCCTGACGACCAGTA 2100
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 2347 CCCGCAGGCATGGTCGGACCTGTGCCCGACTTACGACGCGCTCTCGCCTGACGACCAGTA 2406
Qy 2101 G 2101
|
Db 2407 G 2407
Prosecution Insights