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
The Amendments filed on 8/4/2026 has been received and entered.
Claims 1 and 4-6 are pending and examined on the merits.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Any rejection not reiterated below are hereby withdrawn.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Honda DREAMO strain, adrenergic receptor alpha 1B, in the reply filed on 4/15/2026 is 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)).
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 7/27/2026, 2/6/2026, 7/11/2025, 1/13/2025, 1/24/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1 and 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (2009, Biosci, Biotechnol, Biochem, 73: 2803-2805) in view of Shinobara et al. (from IDS, WO 2017/217116 A1). This is a new rejection.
Park et al. teaches a composition of Chlamydomonas cell disruptant containing dimethyl sulfoxide (Abstract). The cell disruptant of the unicellular green alga Chlamydomonas reinhardtii (page 2803, left column, paragraph 1, last line). The composition would inherently have all the functions of Claims 4-6 because the same extract or organism would have the same chemical activities.
However, Park et al. does not teach Honda DREAMO strain (Accession No. FERM BP 22306).
Shinobara et al. teaches a composition of Chlamydomonas including Honda DREAMO strain (Accession No. FERM BP 22306) (page 2, Description of Embodiments, paragraph 2). The microalga can grow in the dark anaerobic conditions and grow aggregating (Claim 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Honda DREAMO strain (Accession No. FERM BP 22306) because Shinobara et al. teaches a composition of Chlamydomonas including Honda DREAMO strain (Accession No. FERM BP 22306) (page 2, Description of Embodiments, paragraph 2). The microalga can grow in the dark anaerobic conditions and grow aggregating (Claim 1). One would have been motivated to make a drug composition from microalga for the expected benefit of easier growth and collection of the microalga. Absent evidence to the contrary, there would have been a reasonable expectation of success in making the claimed invention from the combined teachings of the cited references.
Conclusion
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 CATHERYNE CHEN whose telephone number is (571)272-9947. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-5:30 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, Anand U Desai can be reached at 571-272-0947. 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.
Catheryne Chen Examiner Art Unit 1655
/ANAND U DESAI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1655
Prosecution Insights