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. The Office acknowledges the receipt of Applicant’s amendment filed August 11, 2025. Claims 1, 4, 6, 11-13 and 15 are pending and are examined in the instant application. Applicant states that the claim amendments can be found at designated paragraph numbers. However, the paragraphs in the specification are not numbered.
All previous rejections not set forth below have been withdrawn.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
This action is made FINAL.
The Office has received Applicant’s foreign priority benefit Application No. CN202110361871.6. However, to meet all foreign priority benefit conditions set forth under 35 USC 119(a-d), a certified English translation must also be submitted. As no certified English translation has been received. Applicant has benefit of the filing date of PCT/CN2022/081651, filed March 18, 2022.
Claim Objections
2. Claims 1, 4, 6, 11-13 and 15 are objected to because of the following:
In claims 1(1) and 15(1), the “or” before “adventitious” should be deleted to remove multiple recitations of “or”.
In claims 1(1) and 15(1), “uses” should be amended to “is a” because a medium does not actively “uses” a medium.
In claims 1(1) and 15(1), “a basic” should be amended to “the base” as there is only one base medium, and “basic medium” implies a medium having a pH of greater than 7.
In claims 1(2) and 15(2), “wherein” should be inserted before “stem cells”. Otherwise, there is no nexus between the two phrases set forth in step (2).
In claims 1(5) and 15(5), “stem cells colonies” should be amended to “stem cell colonies” for grammatical correctness.
In the last “wherein” clause of claims 1 and 15, “the” should be inserted before “pH” because each medium only has one pH value.
In claims 4 and 6, “is” should be inserted before “in the range” for grammatical correctness.
In claim 6, “is” should be inserted before “once” for grammatical correctness.
Dependent claims are included.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
3. Claims 1, 4, 6, 11-13 and 15 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 pre-AIA the Applicant regards as the invention.
In claims 1(1) and 15(1), there is no nexus between “washing and disinfecting taproots, rhizomes, or adventitious roots on rhizomes, lateral roots, or fibrous roots of mature ginseng” and “cutting the disinfected mature ginseng into slices”. Does the “disinfected mature ginseng” refer to the “taproots, rhizomes, or adventitious roots on rhizomes, lateral roots, or fibrous roots”? “[T]he disinfected mature ginseng” lacks antecedence.
In claims 1, 11, 12 and 15, the metes and bounds of “gel” are unclear. It is unclear whether Applicant is referring to a particular component (which one?) or a particular viscosity.
In claims 1 and 15, step (4), “picking a portion of the stem cell masses” is unclear because it is not known what criteria are used to determine what stem cell masses are picked or selected.
In claim 4, “cultivating” lacks antecedence. Claim 1, steps (3) and (4), do not recite “cultivating”.
In claim 4, the recitation of “until the inoculated stem cells grow cell masses” is unclear because step (4) of claim 1 begins with cell masses.
In claim 6, “cultivating” lacks antecedence. Claim 1, step (5), does not recite “cultivating”.
In claim 6, “subculturing” lacks antecedence. Claim 1, step (5), does not recite “subculturing”. Furthermore, it is unclear what is being subcultured in step (5).
Correction and/or clarification is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a)
4. Claims 1, 4, 6, 11-13 and 15 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. This is a new matter rejection.
In claims 1 and 15, Applicant is invited to point to the page and line number in the specification where support for “colonies” can be found. Additionally, in claims 1, 11, 12 and 15, Applicant is invited to point to the page and line number in the specification where support for “gel” can be found. PhytagelTM is a trademark product of Sigma Aldrich, is composed of glucuronic acid, rhamnose and glucose, and is not synonymous with “gel”.
Absent of support, Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in response to the instant Office action.
Conclusion
5. No claim is allowed.
6. 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.
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHUONG T BUI whose telephone number is (571)272-0793. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8am-5pm.
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, Amjad Abraham can be reached on 571-270-7058. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/PHUONG T BUI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1663