Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026
Application No. 18/261,874

METHODS FOR DETECTING utDNA

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Jul 18, 2023
Priority
Jan 18, 2021 — provisional 63/138,705 +1 more
Examiner
SALMON, KATHERINE D
Art Unit
1682
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Washington University
OA Round
2 (Final)
43%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
9m
Est. Remaining
81%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 43% of resolved cases
43%
Career Allowance Rate
341 granted / 797 resolved
-17.2% vs TC avg
Strong +38% interview lift
Without
With
+37.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 0m
Avg Prosecution
68 currently pending
Career history
908
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
19.2%
-20.8% vs TC avg
§103
28.6%
-11.4% vs TC avg
§102
11.4%
-28.6% vs TC avg
§112
34.9%
-5.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 797 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . This action is in response to papers filed 7/27/2026. Applicant’s election of the species of MRD and TERT and TP53 in the reply filed on 1/19/2026 s acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). Claims 83-84, 86-89, 93-94, 101 are pending. Claims 1-82, 85, 90-92, 95-100, 102 have been cancelled. Claims 101 is withdrawn as being drawn to a nonelected species. The following rejections are newly applied necessitated by amendment. This action is FINAL. Withdrawn Rejections The 35 USC 112 b, 35 USC 101, 35 USC 102 and 35 USC 103 rejections made in the previous office action are withdrawn based upon amendments to the claims. 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. Claims 83-84, 86-89, 93-94are 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 83-84, 86-89, 93-94 contains the trademark/trade name “urine Cancer Personalized Profiling by Deep Sequencing”. Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. In the present case, the trademark/trade name is used to identify/describe the dep sequencing methodology and, accordingly, the identification/description is indefinite. CLiams 83-84, 86-89, 93-94 are indefinite over “determining a VA in the detected utDNA for one or more non-silent mutations…percentage of mutant reads at a specified genomic position”. This phrase is unclear as it appears that VAF requires “a specified genomic position”, however, it is not clear if this position is intended to be the non-silent mutation or if the claims encompass another position. Further the when steps are drawn to square root of the VAF, however, there is no step for performing the square root. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 83-84, 86-89, 93-94 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The claims are drawn to treating a residual urinary tract associate cancer based upon subjecting the biological sample to uCAPP-Seq, detecting utDNA, and determining variant allele for one or more non-silent mutations. The claims as amended require uCAPP-Seq and detection of non-silent mutations to determine treatment steps. The claims are drawn to any non-silent mutations in any genes, however, the specification has only provided 52 non-silent mutations (para 151 and table 6). The specification states determination of a combination of non-silent mutations wherein the levels of utDNA was measured above or below 2.3% (para 156-219). Therefore the specification has not described measurements of one non-silent mutation and determination of treatment. Furthermore the specification has not provided guidance to determine treatment based upon any non-silent mutation but rather provides determination of a group of mutations provided in the specification in table 6. Conclusion No claims are 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATHERINE D SALMON whose telephone number is (571)272-3316. The examiner can normally be reached 9-530. 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, Wu Cheng (Winston) Shen can be reached at 5712723157. 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. /KATHERINE D SALMON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1682
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 18, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 27, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Jul 27, 2026
Response Filed
Sep 25, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12748103
METHODS FOR SELECTING AND TREATING CANCER WITH FGFR3 INHIBITORS
3y 9m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12729405
METHOD AND KIT FOR DETERMINING BENEFIT OF CHEMOTHERAPY
4y 6m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12709776
NOVEL MARKER OF EPITHELIAL-MESENCHYMAL TRANSITION IN PANCREATIC CANCER
4y 12m to grant Granted Aug 18, 2026
Patent 12674190
SYSTEMS, COMPOSITIONS, AND METHODS FOR TARGET ENTITY DETECTION
5y 3m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12637720
MOLECULAR SUBTYPING OF SMALL CELL LUNG CANCER TO PREDICT THERAPEUTIC RESPONSES
2y 11m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
43%
Grant Probability
81%
With Interview (+37.9%)
4y 0m (~9m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 797 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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