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 .
Status of claims
Applicant’s response filed 5/29/2026 has been entered.
Claims 1-6 have been amended.
Claims 21-23 are newly added. Claim 21 essentially is drawn to the subject matter of claims 1 and 3. Thus, the new claims are examined along.
Note: On 8/6/2024, the applicant elected Group I, claims 1-8, and species SEQ ID NO: 10 (from SEQ ID NOs: 9-29).
In summary, claims 1-8, 21-23 are examined in this office action. Non-elected claims and species are withdrawn.
All previous objections and rejections not set forth below have been withdrawn in view of the applicant’s amendment and/or upon further consideration. See “Response to Arguments” at the end of office action.
The following rejections are repeated, modified and/or added for the reasons of record as set forth in the last Office action of 12/29/2025, and/or necessitated by the applicant’s amendments. The applicant’s arguments filed 5/29/2026 have been thoroughly considered but are not deemed fully persuasive.
Interpretation of two or more FAD2 gene copies
The specification does not define “Two or more FAD2 gene copies” or “two or more gene copies”. Claims do not require two or more FAD2 gene copies in different genes.
In the art, a homozygous gene has two copies of the same gene or transgene or mutation. See Passricha et al (Review. Assessing zygosity in progeny of transgenic plants: current methods and perspectives. Journal of Biological Methods, p1-13, 2016) p3, right col, last para; p7, right col, 1st para.
In addition, there is no evidence that SEQ ID NO: 1, 2 or 3 is a single copy gene in Brassica.
Thus, by BRI, (1) a homozygous mutation in any of the SEQ ID NO: 1, 2 or 3, or (2) mutations in multiple copies of any of the SEQ ID NO: 1, 2 or 3, is/are interpreted as mutations in two or more FAD2 gene copies.
Note: Otherwise, new claim 22 only requires one of the SEQ ID NO: 2 or SEQ ID NO: 3 being targeted, thus, might have been subjected to 112(d) issue.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Lacking written description
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.
Claims 1-8, 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a), 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 pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
To claim a genus under the written description requirement, the applicant is required to describe a representative number of species to reflect the variation within the genus or structures sufficient to define the genus. The factors to be considered include disclosure of complete or partial structure, physical and/or chemical properties, functional characteristics, structure/function correlation, methods of making the claimed product, or any combinations thereof.
By court’s statement in Regents of the Univ. of Cal. v. Eli Lilly, 119 F.3d 1559, 1566, 43 USPQ2d 1398, 1404 (Fed. Cir. 1997), a written description of an invention “requires a precise definition, such as a structure, formula, or chemical name, of the claimed subject matter sufficient to distinguish it from other materials”; further, a written description of a claimed genus requires a description of a representative number of species of the claimed genus, and one of skill in the art should be able to “visualize or recognize the identity of the members of the genus”.
The amended claims are broadly drawn to a genus of Brassica plants, plant parts, or plant cells comprising a genus of induced mutations (knockout mutations in two or more FAD2 gene copies, to SEQ ID NO: 1, 2 or 3) as compared to oil produced from a corresponding wild type Brassica plant, plant part, or plant cell, wherein the mutation was induced by rare cuffing endonucleases.
The claimed specific function is that the oil produced from the plant, plant part, or plant cell has a specific composition (oleic acid content of the oil is increased by at least 25%, and linolenic acid content is increased by at least 30%, as compared to oil produced by the corresponding wild-type Brassica plant).
The specific function requires specific genetic structure. In this particular case, the genetic structure refers to specific modifications of the FAD2 genes.
As analyzed above, (1) a homozygous mutation in any of the SEQ ID NO: 1, 2 or 3, or (2) mutations in multiple copies of any of the SEQ ID NO: 1, 2 or 3, is/are interpreted as mutations in two or more FAD2 gene copies.
The specification describes the structures of SEQ ID NOs: 1-3 in the sequence listing.
Regarding claims 5 and 20, by the examiner’s alignment, SEQ ID NO: 10 (elected species, 48 bp) is a fragment of SEQ ID NO: 1 (1155 bp) from 76-123:
SEQ ID NO: 10 1 TGCGAGACACCGCCCTTCACTGTCGGAGAACTCAAGAAAGCAATCCCA 48
SEQ ID NO: 1 76 TGCGAGACACCGCCCTTCACTGTCGGAGAACTCAAGAAAGCAATCCCA 123
The specification also describes making 2 lines of T0 Brassica napus plants, each line comprises multiple mutations (Example 4 in pages 35-38):
Line 1 (Bn432-a) had mutations in:
A 3 bp deletion (SEQ ID NO:53900) and a 6 bp deletion (SEQ ID NO:53901) in the BnaA.FAD2.a gene. The 3 bp deletion corresponded to nucleotides 98-100 of SEQ ID NO:1, and the 6 bp deletion corresponded to nucleotides 97-102 of SEQ ID NO:1.
A 3 bp deletion and a 1 bp insertion in one allele of the BnaC.FAD2.a gene (SEQ ID NO:53902) and a 7 bp deletion (SEQ ID NO:53903) in the other allele of the BnaC.FAD2.a gene. The 3 bp deletion corresponded to nucleotides 99-101 of SEQ ID NO:3, and the 1 bp insertion was at nucleotide 99. The 7 bp deletion corresponded to nucleotides 98-104 of SEQ ID NO:3.
A 13 bp deletion (SEQ ID NO:53904) in one allele of the BnaC.Fad2.b gene. The 13 bp deletion corresponded to nucleotides 92-104 of SEQ ID NO:2. Line 2 (Bn432-b) had mutations in:
A 6 bp deletion and a 50 bp insertion (SEQ ID NO:53905) in both alleles of the BnaA.FAD2.a gene. The 6 bp deletion corresponded to nucleotides 96-101 of SEQ ID NO:1, with the 50 bp fragment inserted at position 96.
A 6 bp deletion and a 50 bp insertion (SEQ ID NO:53905) in one allele of the BnaC.FAD2.a gene and an 18 bp deletion and a 166 bp insertion (SEQ ID NO:53906) in the other allele of the BnaC.FAD2.a gene. The 6 bp deletion corresponded to nucleotides 96-101 of SEQ ID NO:3, with the 50 bp fragment inserted at position 96. The 18 bp deletion corresponded to nucleotides 101-118 of SEQ ID NO:3 with the 166 bp fragment inserted at position 101.
Applicant then crossed Line 1 (Bn432-a) and Line 2 (Bn432-b) to make knockout mutations in above multiple positions.
Applicant achieve the following results (Example 5 in pages 38-39):
One 3 gene knockout mutant had 24% increase (the highest) in oleic acid as compared to oil produced by a corresponding wild type Brassica plant in seeds;
One 2 gene knockout mutant had 21.9% increase in oleic acid as compared to oil produced by a corresponding wild type Brassica plant in seeds;
Another 2 gene knockout mutant had 23.4% increase in oleic acid as compared to oil produced by a corresponding wild type Brassica plant in seeds;
One 1 gene knockout mutant had 20.9% increase in oleic acid as compared to oil produced by a corresponding wild type Brassica plant in seeds.
The examiner went deeper and found:
In Table 15 (p59-62), the last 2 rows are 2 wild types, the oleic acid % are 68.40% and 66.10%. A 25% increase would be 85.5% and 82.6%. None of the knockout mutants reached 85.5% (the highest is 85.0%). Nevertheless, some of the knockout mutants reached higher than 82.6%.
It is noticed by the examiner that all of knockout mutants having higher than 82.6% (presumed 25% increase) oleic acid at least have one homozygote knockout in FAD2 genes, FAD2.b (-13/-13) and/or FAD2.a (-3/-3 and/or -6/-6).
Some of the knockout mutants also have at least 30% decrease in linolenic acids. For example, the wild-types have 6.50% and 5.20%, while the knockout modified plants have as low as 2.9%.
According to the instant sequence listing (8/7/2023), SEQ ID NO: 1 and SEQ ID NO: 3 are FAD2.a genes, SEQ ID NO: 2 is a FAD2.b gene.
In summary, from the applicant’s data serving as the description, at the very least:
(1) the knockout of SEQ ID NO: 2 requires to be homozygote, and
(2) the knockout of SEQ ID NO:1 AND SEQ ID NO: 3 require to be at least heterozygote,
in order for the mutant Brassica plant to reach a 25% increase in oleic acid and a 30% decrease in linolenic acid.
Both (1) and (2) should be satisfied.
However, claim 1 only require knockout mutations in two or more FAD2 gene copies within a sequence having at least 90% identity to SEQ ID NO: 1, 2 or 3.
In the art, multiple references also teach the same such knockout mutations including homozygote mutations in one of the SEQ ID NO: 1, 2 or 3 (i.e., Kodali et al; Gocal et al), but do not teach BOTH the 25% increase in oleic acid AND the 30% decrease in linolenic acid in the same Brassica line. See art rejections below.
Hence, neither the specification nor the art describes the structure feature of knockout mutations in two or more FAD2 gene copies within a sequence having at least 90% identity to SEQ ID NO: 1, 2 or 3, is sufficiently associated to 25% increase in oleic acid and 30% decrease in linolenic acid in mutant Brassica plants as compared to that of wild type Brassica plants.
Regarding the description of a representative number of species, the only examples of higher than 25% increase in oleic acid and 30% decrease in linolenic acid are that at the very least, (1) the knockout of SEQ ID NO: 2 requires to be homozygote, plus (2) the knockout of SEQ ID NO: 1 AND SEQ ID NO: 3 require to be at least heterozygote.
There is no example of knockout mutations in two or more FAD2 gene copies within a sequence having at least 90% identity to SEQ ID NO: 1, 2 or 3, is associated to 25% increase in oleic acid and 30% decrease in linolenic acid. The claimed number is extremely large and heterologous in structure.
Therefore, the application has not met either of the two elements of the written description requirement as set forth in the court’s decision in Eli Lilly, and has not shown her/his possession of the claimed genus at the time of the application.
Note: Regarding claim 3 and new claim 21, the claims only require one of the specific deletions, not the combination of all of the specific deletions, not even any combination of some specific deletions, thus, the claims do not overcome the deficiency.
Regarding claim 5 and new claim 23, as analyzed above, SEQ ID NO: 10 (elected species) is a fragment of SEQ ID NO: 1 (a FAD2.a sequence). Thus, the claims do not overcome the deficiency.
Other dependent claims do not overcome the deficiency.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed 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, 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(2) as being anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Kodali et al (US Patent 6414223, granted and published 7/2/2002).
The amended claim 1 is drawn to Brassica plant, plant part, or plant cell comprising an induced mutation in two or more FAD2 gene copies (knockout mutation in two or more FAD2 gene copies, the knockout mutations comprising insertions or deletions within a sequence having at least 90% identity to SEQ ID NO: 1, 2 or 3), wherein the mutation was induced by rare cutting endonucleases targeted to the two or more FAD2 gene copies.
The oil produced from the plant, plant part, or plant cell has increased oleic acid content (by 25%) and decreased linolenic acid content (by 30%) as compared to oil produced from a corresponding wild type Brassica plant, plant part, or plant cell.
As analyzed above, (1) a homozygous mutation in any of the SEQ ID NO: 1, 2 or 3, or (2) mutations in multiple copies of any of the SEQ ID NO: 1, 2 or 3, is/are interpreted as mutations in two or more FAD2 gene copies.
Kodali et al disclose a sequence (reference SEQ ID NO: 9) from Brassica napus that is 100% identical to instant SEQ ID NO: 1; and disclose a sequence (reference SEQ ID NO: 13) from Brassica napus that is 100% identical to instant SEQ ID NO: 3. See “Sequence Matches” at the end of office action.
Kodali et al teach characterizing SEQ ID NO: 1 and SEQ ID NO: 3 as FAD2 coding genes (col3, lines 12-22).
Kodali et al teach making mutations of FAD2 genes including of SEQ ID NO: 1 and SEQ ID NO: 3 in the Brassica plant seed (col 3, lines 33-53, figs 1-4), and Kodali et al teach and demonstrated making homozygote mutations (reading on two or more gene copies) of FAD2 genes (Examples 5 in col 24-24). The mutations are insertions and/or deletions (col 5-col 7).
Kodali et al obtained the fatty acid compositions including oleic acid (18:1) and linolenic acid content (18:3) (Examples 5-6, Tables 18-19 in col 25-26).
Kodali et al teach that oleic acid is increased and linolenic acid is decreased in the FAD2 mutants (col 5).
Accordingly, Kodali et al teach all of the structure limitations of claim 1 (the same Brassica plant cell comprising a knockout mutation in two or more FAD2 gene copies, the knockout mutations comprising insertions or deletions within a sequence having at least 90% identity to SEQ ID NO: 1 or 3), and teach that oleic acid is increased and linolenic acid is decreased in the FAD2 mutants,
except
do not teach that the 25% increased oleic acid content and 30% decreased linolenic acid content as compared to oil produced from a corresponding wild type Brassica plant cell.
However, according to MPEP 2112 III, A REJECTION UNDER 35 U.S.C. 102/103 CAN BE MADE WHEN THE PRIOR ART PRODUCT SEEMS TO BE IDENTICAL EXCEPT THAT THE PRIOR ART IS SILENT AS TO AN INHERENT CHARACTERISTIC. Where applicant claims a composition in terms of a function, property or characteristic and the composition of the prior art is the same as that of the claim but the function is not explicitly disclosed by the reference, the examiner may make a rejection under both 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103, expressed as a 102/103 rejection. “There is nothing inconsistent in concurrent rejections for obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 and for anticipation under 35 U.S.C. 102.” In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255 n.4, 195 USPQ 430, 433 n.4 (CCPA 1977). This same rationale should also apply to product, apparatus, and process claims claimed in terms of function, property or characteristic. Therefore, a 35 U.S.C. 102/103 rejection is appropriate for these types of claims as well as for composition claims.
In addition, MPEP 2112 I states that “[T]he discovery of a previously unappreciated property of a prior art composition, or of a scientific explanation for the prior art’s functioning, does not render the old composition patentably new to the discoverer.” Atlas Powder Co. v. Ireco Inc., 190 F.3d 1342, 1347, 51 USPQ2d 1943, 1947 (Fed. Cir. 1999). Thus, the claiming of a new use, new function or unknown property which is inherently present in the prior art does not necessarily make the claim patentable. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1254, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).”
In addition, MPEP 2111.04 teaches that "WHEREIN" Claim scope is not limited by claim language that suggests or makes optional but does not require steps to be performed, or by claim language that does not limit a claim to a particular structure.
Critically, as analyzed above, the applicant only demonstrated the oil composition having a 25% increase in oleic acid and a 30% decrease in linolenic acid by (1) the knockout of SEQ ID NO: 2 requires to be homozygote, and (2) the knockout of SEQ ID NO:1 AND SEQ ID NO: 3 require to be at least heterozygote, but broadly claims but does not demonstrated that wherein the knockout mutations comprising insertions or deletions within a sequence having at least 90% identity to SEQ ID NO: 1, 2 or 3. Thus, the oil composition having a 25% increase in oleic acid and a 30% decrease in linolenic acid is deemed intended use of the knockout mutations comprising insertions or deletions within a sequence having at least 90% identity to SEQ ID NO: 1, 2 or 3.
Kodali et al teach the exact modifications of the FAD2 genes and in the same Brassica plant, which is the same as recited in claim 1. The result of increased oleic acid content and decrease linolenic acid should be the same and are inherent from the modification of the FAD2 genes/SEQ ID NO: 1, 2 or 3 in Brassica plant.
Therefore, the invention and claims are anticipated by or, in the alternative, as obvious over, Kodali et al.
Claims 1-2, 4, 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(2) as being anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Gocal et al (US 20210010013/US application 17040703, effectively filed 4/4/2018).
Note: application 17040703 was effectively filed 4/4/2018 as Provisional Application 62652623, which is before the instant effective filing date of 7/9/2018.
Claims have been analyzed above.
As analyzed above, (1) a homozygous mutation in any of the SEQ ID NO: 1, 2 or 3, or (2) mutations in multiple copies of any of the SEQ ID NO: 1, 2 or 3, is/are interpreted as mutations in two or more FAD2 gene copies.
Gocal et al disclose a sequence (reference SEQ ID NO: 1) from Brassica napus that is 100% identical to instant SEQ ID NO: 1; Gocal et al disclose a sequence (reference SEQ ID NO: 4) from Brassica napus that is 99.7% identical to instant SEQ ID NO: 2; Gocal et al disclose a sequence (reference SEQ ID NO: 2) from Brassica napus that is 100% identical to instant SEQ ID NO: 3. See “Sequence Matches” at the end of office action.
Gocal et al characterize instant SEQ ID NO: 1/reference SEQ ID NO: 1 as bnFAD2-1 gene sequence; instant SEQ ID NO: 2/reference SEQ ID NO: 4 as bnFAD2-4 gene sequence; and instant SEQ ID NO: 3/reference SEQ ID NO: 2 as bnFAD2-2 gene sequence (Example 1, [0414]).
Gocal et al teach making a construct/vector comprising CRISPR gene and Cas9 gene, to target FAD2 genes in Brassica plant cells/protoplasts/seeds, to make site-specific knockout mutations to all FAD2 gene sequences including bnFAD2-1, bnFAD2-2 and bnFAD2-4, and successfully selected a Brassica plant mutations in two or more different FAD2 genes (narrower and more specific than “two or more FAD2 gen copies) by testing each of the targeted FAD2 genes, including bnFAD2-1, bnFAD2-2 and bnFAD2-4 (reference SEQ ID NOs: 1, 2 and 4) ([0341], Examples 1-2, [0414]-[0417], tables 1-2).
The mutant cells were successfully regenerated to Brassica plant comprising seeds, the seeds were harvested to do fatty acid analysis ([0416]-[0417]). The selected Brassica plant had increased oleic acid (18:1, 75.31%) in seed oil, higher than that in the seed oil of wild-type plant (61-64% oleic acid) ([0421]-[0422], table 4B). The selected Brassica plant also had decreased linolenic acid (18:3) as low as 2.6%, as compared to the seed oil of wild-type plant (21.26%) ([0422], table 4C).
Thus, Gocal et al teach all of the structure limitations of claim 1 (the same Brassica plant cell comprising knockout mutations in two or more different FAD2 genes, the knockout mutations comprising insertions or deletions within a sequence having at least 90% identity to SEQ ID NO: 1, 2 or 3), except
do not teach that the oil produced from the plant cell has increased oleic acid content (by 25%) and decreased linolenic acid content (by 30%) as compared to oil produced from a corresponding wild type Brassica plant cell.
However, according to MPEP 2112 III, A REJECTION UNDER 35 U.S.C. 102/103 CAN BE MADE WHEN THE PRIOR ART PRODUCT SEEMS TO BE IDENTICAL EXCEPT THAT THE PRIOR ART IS SILENT AS TO AN INHERENT CHARACTERISTIC. Where applicant claims a composition in terms of a function, property or characteristic and the composition of the prior art is the same as that of the claim but the function is not explicitly disclosed by the reference, the examiner may make a rejection under both 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103, expressed as a 102/103 rejection. “There is nothing inconsistent in concurrent rejections for obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 and for anticipation under 35 U.S.C. 102.” In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255 n.4, 195 USPQ 430, 433 n.4 (CCPA 1977). This same rationale should also apply to product, apparatus, and process claims claimed in terms of function, property or characteristic. Therefore, a 35 U.S.C. 102/103 rejection is appropriate for these types of claims as well as for composition claims.
In addition, MPEP 2112 I states that “[T]he discovery of a previously unappreciated property of a prior art composition, or of a scientific explanation for the prior art’s functioning, does not render the old composition patentably new to the discoverer.” Atlas Powder Co. v. Ireco Inc., 190 F.3d 1342, 1347, 51 USPQ2d 1943, 1947 (Fed. Cir. 1999). Thus, the claiming of a new use, new function or unknown property which is inherently present in the prior art does not necessarily make the claim patentable. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1254, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).”
In addition, MPEP 2111.04 teaches that "WHEREIN" Claim scope is not limited by claim language that suggests or makes optional but does not require steps to be performed, or by claim language that does not limit a claim to a particular structure.
In this particular case, since Gocal et al teach the same structure as instantly claimed, the oleic acid and linolenic acid content should be inherently the same.
Critically, as analyzed above, the applicant only demonstrated the oil composition having a 25% increase in oleic acid and a 30% decrease in linolenic acid by (1) the knockout of SEQ ID NO: 2 requires to be homozygote, and (2) the knockout of SEQ ID NO:1 AND SEQ ID NO: 3 require to be at least heterozygote, but broadly claims but does not demonstrated that wherein the knockout mutations comprising insertions or deletions within a sequence having at least 90% identity to SEQ ID NO: 1, 2 or 3. Thus, the oil composition having a 25% increase in oleic acid and a 30% decrease in linolenic acid is deemed intended use of the knockout mutations comprising insertions or deletions within a sequence having at least 90% identity to SEQ ID NO: 1, 2 or 3.
Gocal et al teach the exact modifications of the FAD2 genes/SEQ ID NO: 1, 2 or 3 and in Brassica plant, which is the same as recited in claim 1. The result of increased oleic acid content and decrease linolenic acid should be the same and are inherent from the modification of the FAD2 genes/SEQ ID NO: 1, 2 or 3 in Brassica plant.
Therefore, the invention and claims are anticipated by or, in the alternative, as obvious over, Gocal et al.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 non-obviousness.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kodali et al as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Gocal et al.
As analyzed above, claim 1 is anticipated by or, in the alternative, as obvious over, Kodali et al.
Claim 4 limits claim 1, wherein each induced mutation is induced by TALE nucleases, meganucleases, zinc-finger nucleases, or CRISPR/Cas.
Kodali et al do not teach such a limitation.
As analyzed above, Gocal et al teach and demonstrated make site-specific knockout mutations to all FAD2 gene sequences including bnFAD2-1, bnFAD2-2 and bnFAD2-4.
An invention would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art if any teaching, suggestion or motivation in prior art leading the one to combine the teaching(s) or suggestion(s) of the cited references to arrive the claimed invention.
In this case, it would have been obvious to modify the invention of Kodali et al, such that the mutation is made by the endonuclease CRISPR-Cas, as suggested and demonstrated by Gocal et al. One ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so for the same advantage of site-specific knockout, also as taught by Gocal et al. The expectation of success would have been high, because the method of making mutations by using CRISPR-Cas is routine and had been taught by Gocal et al.
Therefore, the claim would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kodali et al or Gocal et al as applied to claims 1 and 4 above, and further in view of sequences disclosed in GenEmbl (for example, DQ518271, DQ518277, DQ518280, and DQ518282, each was published in 2016).
As analyzed above, claims 1 and 4 are anticipated by or, in the alternative, as obvious over, Kodali et al or Gocal et al.
Claim 5 limits claim 4, wherein each of the endonucleases is targeted to a sequence within any of the sequences set forth in SEQ ID NO: 10 (elected species), or to a sequence having at least 90% identity to any of SEQ ID NO: 10.
As analyzed above, Gocal et al anticipate claims 1 and 4.
As analyzed above, Gocal et al teach Brassica plant having mutations in SEQ ID NO: 1, SEQ ID NO: 3, and a sequence 99.7% identical to SEQ ID NO: 2, but are silent on if the mutations were within SEQ ID NO: 10 or not.
By examiner’s alignment, SEQ ID NO: 10 has 48 bases, and is a fragment of SEQ ID NO: 1 and SEQ ID NO: 3 (each 1155 bases) from 76-123. See “Sequence Matches” at the end of office action.
Thus, Gocal et al teach that SEQ ID NO: 1 or 3 comprises SEQ ID NO: 10, and that SEQ ID NO: 10 is in the 5’ side of SEQ ID NO: 1 or 3.
Gocal et al further suggest making frameshift mutations in SEQ ID NO: 1 or 3 ([0028]). Gocal et al also suggest making repairments/mutations at 5’ end of a target FAD2 sequence, leading to making desired mismatches at 5’ end of a target FAD2 sequence for improving targeting efficiency (Improving Efficiency. 2. In [0298]). Hence, any ordinary skill in the art would have known that a frameshift mutation at 5’-end of an encoding gene would likely lead to encoding a truncated and non-functional peptide, which is an advantage.
DQ518271 (2016), DQ518277 (2016), DQ518280 (2016) and DQ518282 (2016) teach that SEQ ID NO: 10 matches 100% in multiple Brassica plant species: at least in Brassica species of napus, carinata, nigra, and oleracea. See “Sequence Matches” at the end of office action.
In fact, by examiner’s blast of SEQ ID NO: 10, majority of the matches were published before the instant filing date, and indicated that SEQ ID NO: 10 sequence (100% matches) as a fragment of omega-6 fatty acid desaturase/FAD2 (see attached “NCBI Blast_Nucleotide Sequence_SEQ ID NO10_2024.pdf).
Thus, SEQ ID NO: 10 is a fragment of the known Brassica napus FAD2 sequence SEQ ID NO: 1 or 3, and is conserved in multiple Brassica species, and at least is an indicator of FAD2 among Brassica species. Thus, targeting SEQ ID NO: 10 would not only target FAD2 in Brassica napus, but also target FAD2 in other Brassica species, which is another advantage.
Hence, SEQ ID NO: 10 is not only a fragment near the 5’ end of the FAD2 sequences, but also is conserved among many Brassica species.
An invention would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art if any teaching, suggestion or motivation in prior art leading the one to combine the teaching(s) or suggestion(s) of the cited references to arrive the claimed invention.
In this case, it would have been obvious to modify the invention of or Kodali et al or Gocal et al, such that the induced mutation by the endonuclease is targeted to within SEQ ID NO: 10, as suggested by Gocal et al motivated by the sequences disclosed in GenEmbl. One ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because the sequence is not only a fragment near the 5’ end of the FAD2 sequences (a frameshift mutation at 5’-end of an encoding gene would likely lead to encoding a truncated and non-functional peptide), but also is conserved among many Brassica species (targeting SEQ ID NO: 10 would not only target FAD2 in Brassica napus, but also target FAD2 in other Brassica species). The expectation of success would have been high, because SEQ ID NO: 10 was located in the 5’end of SEQ ID NOs: 1 and 3. Thus, targeting SEQ ID NO: 10 by frameshift mutation would likely lead to encoding a truncated non-functional fragment of SEQ ID NOs: 1 and 3. The method of making mutations to SEQ ID NOs: 1 and 3 had been taught by Kodali et al or Gocal et al.
Therefore, the claim would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kodali et al or Gocal et al as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Gocal et al (the same reference).
As analyzed above, claim 1 is anticipated by or, in the alternative, as obvious over, Kodali et al or Gocal et al.
Claim 6 recites that wherein the Brassica plant, plant part, or plant cell of claim 1 does not contain a transgene.
Kodali et al or Gocal et al do not teach that the particular mutant Brassica cell does not contain a transgene.
Instant specification does not define “does not contain a transgene”.
Gocal et al nevertheless emphasize/suggest and claim that the FAD2 mutant plant cell is non-transgenic, as an embodiment, and teach the method of making such non-transgenic plant ([0005], [0027], claims 1-9).
Gocal et al further teach the advantage thereof that the “non-transgenic” plant is considered non-GMO ([0043]), and that in contrast to conventional transgenic GMOs, there is no integration of foreign genetic material, nor is any foreign genetic material left in the plant ([0268]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to modify the plant, part or cell of Kodali et al or Gocal et al, such that the plant, part or cell does not contain a transgene as emphasized and/or suggested by Gocal et al. One ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because such plant is considered non-GMO, and there is no integration of foreign genetic material, nor is any foreign genetic material left in the plant, as taught by Gocal et al. The expectation of success would have been high because the method of making had been taught by Gocal et al.
Therefore, the claim would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kodali et al or Gocal et al as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ripley et al (US 20100143570, published 6/10/2010, filed 11/4/2009).
As analyzed above, claim 1 is anticipated by or, in the alternative, as obvious over, Kodali et al or Gocal et al.
Claim 7 limits claim 1, wherein the plant, plant part, or plant cell comprises a transgene encoding EPSPS, a PAT and so on.
Gocal et al additionally teach that the plant and cell having the FAD2 mutation further comprise a gene modification conferring a resistance to herbicides ([0011]), which is a beneficial trait in the plant, but does not teach the particular transgene(s).
Ripley et al teach a Brassica plant comprising a mutated FAD2 gene ([0021]-[2022], claim 12). Ripley et al additionally teach that the plant further comprises particular genes conferring resistance to herbicides including EPSPS gene and PAT gene (“2. Genes that Confer Resistance to an Herbicide:” [0173]-[0174]).
Ripley et al teach the method of introducing the herbicide resistance genes into the plant (Example 6, [0122]-[0123]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to modify the invention of Kodali et al or Gocal et al, such that the plant, part or cell further comprises an herbicide resistance trait as suggested by Gocal et al, and further comprises a specific herbicide resistance trait to EPSPS or PAT as taught by Ripley et al. One ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because such resistance traits are beneficial to the plant. The expectation of success would have been high because the method of introduction had been taught by Ripley et al.
Therefore, the claim would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at issue are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1, 3-5, 7-8, 21, 23 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-8 of US Patent 11624072.
The instant application and the US Patent share the same inventors and the same applicant.
US Patent 11624072 claims:
1. A method for producing a Brassica plant having increased oleic acid content and decreased linolenic acid content, the method comprising:
providing a population of Brassica cells comprising Fatty Acid Desaturase 2 (FAD2) gene copies,
contacting the population of Brassica cells with rare-cutting endonucleases targeted to the two or more FAD2 gene copies, wherein the rare-cutting endonucleases are transcription activator-like effector (TALE) nucleases, wherein each of the TALE nucleases is targeted to a sequence within SEQ ID NO:1, or to a sequence having at least 90% identity to a sequence within SEQ ID NO:1; and within the sequence set forth in SEQ ID NO:10, or to a sequence having at least 90% identity to SEQ ID NO:10,
regenerating Brassica plants from the population of Brassica cells contacted with the rare-cutting endonucleases, and
selecting a Brassica plant with a knockout mutation in two or more FAD2 gene copies,
wherein the selected Brassica plant produces oil having increased oleic acid content and decreased linolenic acid content as compared to oil produced by a corresponding wild type Brassica plant, wherein the oleic acid content of the oil is increased by 25% as compared to oil produced by the corresponding wild-type Brassica plant.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
SEQ ID NO: 1 is identical in the US Patent (reference) and instant application, SEQ ID NO: 10 also is identical in the US Patent and instant application. See “Sequence Matches” at the end of office action.
Thus, reference claims 1, 4 and 8 claims a method of making the product of instant claims 1 and 3-4, and claim 21 in a in a narrower and more specific manner (for example, reference claim 1 claims the subject matter of the combination of SEQ ID NO: 1 and SEQ ID NO: 10, instant claims claim SEQ ID NO: 1, 2 or 3),
except
do not claim “two or more FAD2 gene copies”, and do not claim 30% decrease of linolenic acid in the oil composition.
As analyzed above, (1) a homozygous mutation in any of the SEQ ID NO: 1, 2 or 3, or (2) mutations in multiple copies of any of the SEQ ID NO: 1, 2 or 3, is/are interpreted as mutations in two or more FAD2 gene copies.
As analyzed above, in view of Kodali et al or Gocal et al, the subject matter of knocking out “two or more FAD2 gene copies” including homozygote knockout in Brassica is deemed obvious; and the subject matter of 30% decrease of linolenic acid in the oil composition is deemed inherent.
Regarding dependent claims, reference claim 1 recites SEQ ID NO: 10, thus, teach instant claims 5 and 23.
Regarding claim 7 as analyzed above, in view of Kodali et al or Gocal et al further in view of Ripley et al, the subject matter of “EPSPS” is deemed obvious.
Reference claim 2 claims “embryo cells”, thus teach instant claim 8 (seeds comprise embryos).
Therefore, instant claims and reference claims are obvious over each other.
Claims 2, 6 and 22 recite subject matters of SEQ ID NO: 3 or SEQ ID NO: 2, thus, are excluded.
Remarks
According to the specification (p20, last para), the term "induced mutation" as used herein refers to a mutation that was introduced by human intervention.
Prior art does not teach or suggest making mutations at the specific positions recited in claims 3 and 21-23. However, claims 3 and 21-23 are rejected for lacking written description and/or for double patenting.
Response to Arguments
Claims have been significantly amended. New claims 21-23 are added. New grounds of rejections are necessitated. Accordingly, the claims are interpreted by BRI. All of the rejections are significantly re-written or significantly modified citing new references, as analyzed above.
Thus, the arguments to the previous rejections are no longer applicable, and not persuasive to the new rejections.
Sequence Matches
Against instant SEQ ID NO: 1
RESULT 1
US-09-128-602B-9
(NOTE: this sequence has 6 duplicates in the database searched.
See complete list at the end of this report)
Sequence 9, US/09128602B
Patent No. 6414223
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: Kodali, Dharma
APPLICANT: Fan, Zhegong
APPLICANT: DeBonte, Lorin R.
TITLE OF INVENTION: PLANTS, SEEDS AND OILS HAVING AN ELEVATED TOTAL MONOUNSATURATED
TITLE OF INVENTION: FATTY ACID CONTENT
CURRENT APPLICATION NUMBER: US/09/128,602B
CURRENT FILING DATE: 1998-08-03
NUMBER OF SEQ ID NOS: 68
SEQ ID NO 9
LENGTH: 1155
TYPE: DNA
ORGANISM: Brassica napus
Query Match 100.0%; Score 1155; Length 1155;
Best Local Similarity 100.0%;
Matches 1155; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 ATGGGTGCAGGTGGAAGAATGCAAGTGTCTCCTCCCTCCAAAAAGTCTGAAACCGACAAC 60
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1 ATGGGTGCAGGTGGAAGAATGCAAGTGTCTCCTCCCTCCAAAAAGTCTGAAACCGACAAC 60
Qy 61 ATCAAGCGCGTACCCTGCGAGACACCGCCCTTCACTGTCGGAGAACTCAAGAAAGCAATC 120
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 61 ATCAAGCGCGTACCCTGCGAGACACCGCCCTTCACTGTCGGAGAACTCAAGAAAGCAATC 120
Qy 121 CCACCGCACTGTTTCAAACGCTCGATCCCTCGCTCTTTCTCCTACCTCATCTGGGACATC 180
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 121 CCACCGCACTGTTTCAAACGCTCGATCCCTCGCTCTTTCTCCTACCTCATCTGGGACATC 180
Qy 181 ATCATAGCCTCCTGCTTCTACTACGTCGCCACCACTTACTTCCCTCTCCTCCCTCACCCT 240
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 181 ATCATAGCCTCCTGCTTCTACTACGTCGCCACCACTTACTTCCCTCTCCTCCCTCACCCT 240
Qy 241 CTCTCCTACTTCGCCTGGCCTCTCTACTGGGCCTGCCAGGGCTGCGTCCTAACCGGCGTC 300
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 241 CTCTCCTACTTCGCCTGGCCTCTCTACTGGGCCTGCCAGGGCTGCGTCCTAACCGGCGTC 300
Qy 301 TGGGTCATAGCCCACGAGTGCGGCCACCACGCCTTCAGCGACTACCAGTGGCTGGACGAC 360
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 301 TGGGTCATAGCCCACGAGTGCGGCCACCACGCCTTCAGCGACTACCAGTGGCTGGACGAC 360
Qy 361 ACCGTCGGCCTCATCTTCCACTCCTTCCTCCTCGTCCCTTACTTCTCCTGGAAGTACAGT 420
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 361 ACCGTCGGCCTCATCTTCCACTCCTTCCTCCTCGTCCCTTACTTCTCCTGGAAGTACAGT 420
Qy 421 CATCGACGCCACCATTCCAACACTGGCTCCCTCGAGAGAGACGAAGTGTTTGTCCCCAAG 480
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 421 CATCGACGCCACCATTCCAACACTGGCTCCCTCGAGAGAGACGAAGTGTTTGTCCCCAAG 480
Qy 481 AAGAAGTCAGACATCAAGTGGTACGGCAAGTACCTCAACAACCCTTTGGGACGCACCGTG 540
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 481 AAGAAGTCAGACATCAAGTGGTACGGCAAGTACCTCAACAACCCTTTGGGACGCACCGTG 540
Qy 541 ATGTTAACGGTTCAGTTCACTCTCGGCTGGCCTTTGTACTTAGCCTTCAACGTCTCGGGG 600
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 541 ATGTTAACGGTTCAGTTCACTCTCGGCTGGCCTTTGTACTTAGCCTTCAACGTCTCGGGG 600
Qy 601 AGACCTTACGACGGCGGCTTCGCTTGCCATTTCCACCCCAACGCTCCCATCTACAACGAC 660
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 601 AGACCTTACGACGGCGGCTTCGCTTGCCATTTCCACCCCAACGCTCCCATCTACAACGAC 660
Qy 661 CGTGAGCGTCTCCAGATATACATCTCCGACGCTGGCATCCTCGCCGTCTGCTACGGTCTC 720
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 661 CGTGAGCGTCTCCAGATATACATCTCCGACGCTGGCATCCTCGCCGTCTGCTACGGTCTC 720
Qy 721 TACCGCTACGCTGCTGTCCAAGGAGTTGCCTCGATGGTCTGCTTCTACGGAGTTCCTCTT 780
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 721 TACCGCTACGCTGCTGTCCAAGGAGTTGCCTCGATGGTCTGCTTCTACGGAGTTCCTCTT 780
Qy 781 CTGATTGTCAACGGGTTCTTAGTTTTGATCACTTACTTGCAGCACACGCATCCTTCCCTG 840
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 781 CTGATTGTCAACGGGTTCTTAGTTTTGATCACTTACTTGCAGCACACGCATCCTTCCCTG 840
Qy 841 CCTCACTATGACTCGTCTGAGTGGGATTGGTTGAGGGGAGCTTTGGCCACCGTTGACAGA 900
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 841 CCTCACTATGACTCGTCTGAGTGGGATTGGTTGAGGGGAGCTTTGGCCACCGTTGACAGA 900
Qy 901 GACTACGGAATCTTGAACAAGGTCTTCCACAATATCACGGACACGCACGTGGCGCATCAC 960
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 901 GACTACGGAATCTTGAACAAGGTCTTCCACAATATCACGGACACGCACGTGGCGCATCAC 960
Qy 961 CTGTTCTCGACCATGCCGCATTATCATGCGATGGAAGCTACGAAGGCGATAAAGCCGATA 1020
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 961 CTGTTCTCGACCATGCCGCATTATCATGCGATGGAAGCTACGAAGGCGATAAAGCCGATA 1020
Qy 1021 CTGGGAGAGTATTATCAGTTCGATGGGACGCCGGTGGTTAAGGCGATGTGGAGGGAGGCG 1080
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1021 CTGGGAGAGTATTATCAGTTCGATGGGACGCCGGTGGTTAAGGCGATGTGGAGGGAGGCG 1080
Qy 1081 AAGGAGTGTATCTATGTGGAACCGGACAGGCAAGGTGAGAAGAAAGGTGTGTTCTGGTAC 1140
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1081 AAGGAGTGTATCTATGTGGAACCGGACAGGCAAGGTGAGAAGAAAGGTGTGTTCTGGTAC 1140
Qy 1141 AACAATAAGTTATGA 1155
|||||||||||||||
Db 1141 AACAATAAGTTATGA 1155
US-17-040-703-1
; Sequence 1, Application US/17040703
; Publication No. US20210010013A1
; GENERAL INFORMATION
; APPLICANT: Cibus US LLC
; APPLICANT:Cibus Europe, B.V.
; TITLE OF INVENTION: FAD2 GENES AND MUTATIONS
; FILE REFERENCE: 16507-20002.00
; CURRENT APPLICATION NUMBER: US/17/040,703
; CURRENT FILING DATE: 2020-09-23
; PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PCT/US2019/025881
; PRIOR FILING DATE: 2019-04-04
; PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: US 62/652,623
; PRIOR FILING DATE: 2018-04-04
; NUMBER OF SEQ ID NOS: 54
; SOFTWARE: FastSEQ for Windows Version 4.0
; SEQ ID NO 1
; LENGTH: 1155
; TYPE: DNA
; ORGANISM: Brassica napus
US-17-040-703-1
Query Match 100.0%; Score 1155; DB 84; Length 1155;
Best Local Similarity 100.0%;
Matches 1155; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 ATGGGTGCAGGTGGAAGAATGCAAGTGTCTCCTCCCTCCAAAAAGTCTGAAACCGACAAC 60
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1 ATGGGTGCAGGTGGAAGAATGCAAGTGTCTCCTCCCTCCAAAAAGTCTGAAACCGACAAC 60
Qy 61 ATCAAGCGCGTACCCTGCGAGACACCGCCCTTCACTGTCGGAGAACTCAAGAAAGCAATC 120
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 61 ATCAAGCGCGTACCCTGCGAGACACCGCCCTTCACTGTCGGAGAACTCAAGAAAGCAATC 120
Qy 121 CCACCGCACTGTTTCAAACGCTCGATCCCTCGCTCTTTCTCCTACCTCATCTGGGACATC 180
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 121 CCACCGCACTGTTTCAAACGCTCGATCCCTCGCTCTTTCTCCTACCTCATCTGGGACATC 180
Qy 181 ATCATAGCCTCCTGCTTCTACTACGTCGCCACCACTTACTTCCCTCTCCTCCCTCACCCT 240
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 181 ATCATAGCCTCCTGCTTCTACTACGTCGCCACCACTTACTTCCCTCTCCTCCCTCACCCT 240
Qy 241 CTCTCCTACTTCGCCTGGCCTCTCTACTGGGCCTGCCAGGGCTGCGTCCTAACCGGCGTC 300
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 241 CTCTCCTACTTCGCCTGGCCTCTCTACTGGGCCTGCCAGGGCTGCGTCCTAACCGGCGTC 300
Qy 301 TGGGTCATAGCCCACGAGTGCGGCCACCACGCCTTCAGCGACTACCAGTGGCTGGACGAC 360
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 301 TGGGTCATAGCCCACGAGTGCGGCCACCACGCCTTCAGCGACTACCAGTGGCTGGACGAC 360
Qy 361 ACCGTCGGCCTCATCTTCCACTCCTTCCTCCTCGTCCCTTACTTCTCCTGGAAGTACAGT 420
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 361 ACCGTCGGCCTCATCTTCCACTCCTTCCTCCTCGTCCCTTACTTCTCCTGGAAGTACAGT 420
Qy 421 CATCGACGCCACCATTCCAACACTGGCTCCCTCGAGAGAGACGAAGTGTTTGTCCCCAAG 480
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 421 CATCGACGCCACCATTCCAACACTGGCTCCCTCGAGAGAGACGAAGTGTTTGTCCCCAAG 480
Qy 481 AAGAAGTCAGACATCAAGTGGTACGGCAAGTACCTCAACAACCCTTTGGGACGCACCGTG 540
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 481 AAGAAGTCAGACATCAAGTGGTACGGCAAGTACCTCAACAACCCTTTGGGACGCACCGTG 540
Qy 541 ATGTTAACGGTTCAGTTCACTCTCGGCTGGCCTTTGTACTTAGCCTTCAACGTCTCGGGG 600
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 541 ATGTTAACGGTTCAGTTCACTCTCGGCTGGCCTTTGTACTTAGCCTTCAACGTCTCGGGG 600
Qy 601 AGACCTTACGACGGCGGCTTCGCTTGCCATTTCCACCCCAACGCTCCCATCTACAACGAC 660
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 601 AGACCTTACGACGGCGGCTTCGCTTGCCATTTCCACCCCAACGCTCCCATCTACAACGAC 660
Qy 661 CGTGAGCGTCTCCAGATATACATCTCCGACGCTGGCATCCTCGCCGTCTGCTACGGTCTC 720
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 661 CGTGAGCGTCTCCAGATATACATCTCCGACGCTGGCATCCTCGCCGTCTGCTACGGTCTC 720
Qy 721 TACCGCTACGCTGCTGTCCAAGGAGTTGCCTCGATGGTCTGCTTCTACGGAGTTCCTCTT 780
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 721 TACCGCTACGCTGCTGTCCAAGGAGTTGCCTCGATGGTCTGCTTCTACGGAGTTCCTCTT 780
Qy 781 CTGATTGTCAACGGGTTCTTAGTTTTGATCACTTACTTGCAGCACACGCATCCTTCCCTG 840
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 781 CTGATTGTCAACGGGTTCTTAGTTTTGATCACTTACTTGCAGCACACGCATCCTTCCCTG 840
Qy 841 CCTCACTATGACTCGTCTGAGTGGGATTGGTTGAGGGGAGCTTTGGCCACCGTTGACAGA 900
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 841 CCTCACTATGACTCGTCTGAGTGGGATTGGTTGAGGGGAGCTTTGGCCACCGTTGACAGA 900
Qy 901 GACTACGGAATCTTGAACAAGGTCTTCCACAATATCACGGACACGCACGTGGCGCATCAC 960
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 901 GACTACGGAATCTTGAACAAGGTCTTCCACAATATCACGGACACGCACGTGGCGCATCAC 960
Qy 961 CTGTTCTCGACCATGCCGCATTATCATGCGATGGAAGCTACGAAGGCGATAAAGCCGATA 1020
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 961 CTGTTCTCGACCATGCCGCATTATCATGCGATGGAAGCTACGAAGGCGATAAAGCCGATA 1020
Qy 1021 CTGGGAGAGTATTATCAGTTCGATGGGACGCCGGTGGTTAAGGCGATGTGGAGGGAGGCG 1080
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1021 CTGGGAGAGTATTATCAGTTCGATGGGACGCCGGTGGTTAAGGCGATGTGGAGGGAGGCG 1080
Qy 1081 AAGGAGTGTATCTATGTGGAACCGGACAGGCAAGGTGAGAAGAAAGGTGTGTTCTGGTAC 1140
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1081 AAGGAGTGTATCTATGTGGAACCGGACAGGCAAGGTGAGAAGAAAGGTGTGTTCTGGTAC 1140
Qy 1141 AACAATAAGTTATGA 1155
|||||||||||||||
Db 1141 AACAATAAGTTATGA 1155
Against instant SEQ ID NO: 2
RESULT 3
US-14-019-244-7
(NOTE: this sequence has 3 duplicates in the database searched.
See complete list at the end of this report)
Query Match 99.7%; Score 1151.8; Length 1161;
Best Local Similarity 99.8%;
Matches 1153; Conservative 0; Mismatches 2; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 ATGGGCGCAGGTGGAAGAATGCAAGTCTCTCCTCCCTCCAGCTCCCCCGAAACCAAAACC 60
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1 ATGGGCGCAGGTGGAAGAATGCAAGTCTCTCCTCCCTCCAGCTCCCCCGAAACCAAAACC 60
Qy 61 CTCAAACGCGTCCCCTGCGAGACACCACCCTTCACTCTCGGAGACCTCAAGAAAGCAATC 120
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 61 CTCAAACGCGTCCCCTGCGAGACACCACCCTTCACTCTCGGAGACCTCAAGAAAGCAATC 120
Qy 121 CCACCTCACTGCTTCAAACGCTCCATCCCTCGCTCCTTCTCCTACCTCCTCTTCGACATC 180
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 121 CCACCTCACTGCTTCAAACGCTCCATCCCTCGCTCCTTCTCCTACCTCCTCTTCGACATC 180
Qy 181 CTCGTCTCCTCCTCCCTCTACCACCTCTCCACAGCCTACTTCCCTCTCCTCCCCCACCCT 240
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 181 CTCGTCTCCTCCTCCCTCTACCACCTCTCCACAGCCTACTTCCCTCTCCTCCCCCACCCT 240
Qy 241 CTCCCTTACCTCGCCTGGCCCCTCTACTGGGCCTGCCAAGGCTGCGTCCTAACGGGCCTC 300
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 241 CTCCCTTACCTCGCCTGGCCCCTCTACTGGGCCTGCCAAGGCTGCGTCCTAACGGGCCTC 300
Qy 301 TGGGTCATCGCCCACGAATGCGGCCACCACGCCTTCAGCGACCACCAGTGGCTGGACGAC 360
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 301 TGGGTCATCGCCCACGAATGCGGCCACCACGCCTTCAGCGACCACCAGTGGCTGGACGAC 360
Qy 361 GCCGTGGGCCTCGTCTTCCACTCCTTCCTCCTCGTCCCTTACTTCTCCTGGAAGTACGGC 420
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| ||
Db 361 GCCGTGGGCCTCGTCTTCCACTCCTTCCTCCTCGTCCCTTACTTCTCCTGGAAGTACAGC 420
Qy 421 CATCGACGCCACCATTCCAACACCGGATCCCTCGAGAGGGATGAAGTGCTCGTCCCCAAG 480
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| |||||||||||
Db 421 CATCGACGCCACCATTCCAACACCGGATCCCTCGAGAGGGATGAAGTGTTCGTCCCCAAG 480
Qy 481 AAGAAATCCGACATCAAGTGGTACGGAAAGTACCTCAACAACCCGCTAGGACGCACGGTG 540
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 481 AAGAAATCCGACATCAAGTGGTACGGAAAGTACCTCAACAACCCGCTAGGACGCACGGTG 540
Qy 541 ATGCTAACCGTCCAGTTCACGCTCGGCTGGCCGTTGTACTTAGCCTTCAACGTCTCTGGA 600
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 541 ATGCTAACCGTCCAGTTCACGCTCGGCTGGCCGTTGTACTTAGCCTTCAACGTCTCTGGA 600
Qy 601 AGACCTTACAGCGACGGTTTCGCTTGCCATTTCCACCCGAACGCTCCCATCTACAACGAC 660
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 601 AGACCTTACAGCGACGGTTTCGCTTGCCATTTCCACCCGAACGCTCCCATCTACAACGAC 660
Qy 661 CGCGAGCGTCTCCAGATATACATCTCTGACGCTGGCGTCCTCTCCGTATGTTACGGTCTC 720
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 661 CGCGAGCGTCTCCAGATATACATCTCTGACGCTGGCGTCCTCTCCGTATGTTACGGTCTC 720
Qy 721 TACCGCTACGCTGGTTCGCGAGGAGTGGCCTCGATGGTCTGTGTCTACGGAGTTCCGCTT 780
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 721 TACCGCTACGCTGGTTCGCGAGGAGTGGCCTCGATGGTCTGTGTCTACGGAGTTCCGCTT 780
Qy 781 ATGATTGTCAACTGTTTCCTCGTCTTGATCACTTACTTGCAGCACACGCACCCTTCGCTG 840
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 781 ATGATTGTCAACTGTTTCCTCGTCTTGATCACTTACTTGCAGCACACGCACCCTTCGCTG 840
Qy 841 CCTCACTATGATTCTTCGGAGTGGGATTGGTTGAGAGGAGCTTTGGCTACTGTGGATAGA 900
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 841 CCTCACTATGATTCTTCGGAGTGGGATTGGTTGAGAGGAGCTTTGGCTACTGTGGATAGA 900
Qy 901 GACTATGGAATCTTGAACAAGGTGTTTCATAACATCACGGACACGCACGTGGCGCATCAT 960
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 901 GACTATGGAATCTTGAACAAGGTGTTTCATAACATCACGGACACGCACGTGGCGCATCAT 960
Qy 961 CTGTTCTCGACGATGCCGCATTATAACGCGATGGAAGCGACCAAGGCGATAAAGCCGATA 1020
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 961 CTGTTCTCGACGATGCCGCATTATAACGCGATGGAAGCGACCAAGGCGATAAAGCCGATA 1020
Qy 1021 CTTGGAGAGTATTACCAGTTTGATGGAACGCCGGTGGTTAAGGCGATGTGGAGGGAGGCG 1080
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1021 CTTGGAGAGTATTACCAGTTTGATGGAACGCCGGTGGTTAAGGCGATGTGGAGGGAGGCG 1080
Qy 1081 AAGGAGTGTATCTATGTTGAACCGGATAGGCAAGGTGAGAAGAAAGGTGTGTTCTGGTAC 1140
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1081 AAGGAGTGTATCTATGTTGAACCGGATAGGCAAGGTGAGAAGAAAGGTGTGTTCTGGTAC 1140
Qy 1141 AACAATAAGTTATGA 1155
|||||||||||||||
Db 1141 AACAATAAGTTATGA 1155
One of the 3 DUPLICATES:
US-17-040-703-4
Filing date in PALM: 2020-09-23
Sequence 4, US/17040703
Publication No. US20210010013A1
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: Cibus US LLC
APPLICANT: Cibus Europe, B.V.
TITLE OF INVENTION: FAD2 GENES AND MUTATIONS
FILE REFERENCE: 16507-20002.00
CURRENT APPLICATION NUMBER: US/17/040,703
CURRENT FILING DATE: 2020-09-23
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PCT/US2019/025881
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2019-04-04
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: US 62/652,623
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2018-04-04
NUMBER OF SEQ ID NOS: 54
SEQ ID NO 4
LENGTH: 1155
TYPE: DNA
ORGANISM: Brassica napus
RESULT 1
JN992609
LOCUS JN992609 1155 bp DNA linear PLN 12-MAY-2012
DEFINITION Brassica napus fatty acid desaturase BnaC.FAD2.b gene, complete
cds.
ACCESSION JN992609
VERSION JN992609.1
KEYWORDS .
SOURCE Brassica napus (rape)
ORGANISM Brassica napus
Eukaryota; Viridiplantae; Streptophyta; Embryophyta; Tracheophyta;
Spermatophyta; Magnoliopsida; eudicotyledons; Gunneridae;
Pentapetalae; rosids; malvids; Brassicales; Brassicaceae;
Brassiceae; Brassica.
REFERENCE 1 (bases 1 to 1155)
AUTHORS Yang,Q., Fan,C., Guo,Z., Qin,J., Wu,J., Li,Q., Fu,T. and Zhou,Y.
TITLE Identification of FAD2 and FAD3 genes in Brassica napus genome and
development of allele-specific markers for high oleic and low
linolenic acid contents
JOURNAL Theor. Appl. Genet. (2012) In press
PUBMED 22534790
REMARK Publication Status: Available-Online prior to print
REFERENCE 2 (bases 1 to 1155)
AUTHORS Zhou,Y., Yang,Q. and Fan,C.
TITLE Direct Submission
JOURNAL Submitted (01-NOV-2011) National Key Laboratory of Crop Genetic
Improvement, Huazhong Agricultural University, No. 1, Shizishan
Street Hongshan District, Wuhan, Hubei 430070, China
REMARK Brassica napus
FEATURES Location/Qualifiers
source 1..1155
/organism="Brassica napus"
/mol_type="genomic DNA"
/db_xref="taxon:3708"
mRNA <1..>1155
/product="fatty acid desaturase BnaC.FAD2.b"
CDS 1..1155
/codon_start=1
/product="fatty acid desaturase BnaC.FAD2.b"
/protein_id="AFJ19032.1"
/translation="MGAGGRMQVSPPSSSPETKTLKRVPCETPPFTLGDLKKAIPPHC
FKRSIPRSFSYLLFDILVSSSLYHLSTAYFPLLPHPLPYLAWPLYWACQGCVLTGLWV
IAHECGHHAFSDHQWLDDAVGLVFHSFLLVPYFSWKYGHRRHHSNTGSLERDEVLVPK
KKSDIKWYGKYLNNPLGRTVMLTVQFTLGWPLYLAFNVSGRPYSDGFACHFHPNAPIY
NDRERLQIYISDAGVLSVCYGLYRYAGSRGVASMVCVYGVPLMIVNCFLVLITYLQHT
HPSLPHYDSSEWDWLRGALATVDRDYGILNKVFHNITDTHVAHHLFSTMPHYNAMEAT
KAIKPILGEYYQFDGTPVVKAMWREAKECIYVEPDRQGEKKGVFWYNNKL
Query Match 100.0%; Score 1155; Length 1155;
Best Local Similarity 100.0%;
Matches 1155; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 ATGGGCGCAGGTGGAAGAATGCAAGTCTCTCCTCCCTCCAGCTCCCCCGAAACCAAAACC 60
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1 ATGGGCGCAGGTGGAAGAATGCAAGTCTCTCCTCCCTCCAGCTCCCCCGAAACCAAAACC 60
Qy 61 CTCAAACGCGTCCCCTGCGAGACACCACCCTTCACTCTCGGAGACCTCAAGAAAGCAATC 120
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 61 CTCAAACGCGTCCCCTGCGAGACACCACCCTTCACTCTCGGAGACCTCAAGAAAGCAATC 120
Qy 121 CCACCTCACTGCTTCAAACGCTCCATCCCTCGCTCCTTCTCCTACCTCCTCTTCGACATC 180
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 121 CCACCTCACTGCTTCAAACGCTCCATCCCTCGCTCCTTCTCCTACCTCCTCTTCGACATC 180
Qy 181 CTCGTCTCCTCCTCCCTCTACCACCTCTCCACAGCCTACTTCCCTCTCCTCCCCCACCCT 240
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 181 CTCGTCTCCTCCTCCCTCTACCACCTCTCCACAGCCTACTTCCCTCTCCTCCCCCACCCT 240
Qy 241 CTCCCTTACCTCGCCTGGCCCCTCTACTGGGCCTGCCAAGGCTGCGTCCTAACGGGCCTC 300
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 241 CTCCCTTACCTCGCCTGGCCCCTCTACTGGGCCTGCCAAGGCTGCGTCCTAACGGGCCTC 300
Qy 301 TGGGTCATCGCCCACGAATGCGGCCACCACGCCTTCAGCGACCACCAGTGGCTGGACGAC 360
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 301 TGGGTCATCGCCCACGAATGCGGCCACCACGCCTTCAGCGACCACCAGTGGCTGGACGAC 360
Qy 361 GCCGTGGGCCTCGTCTTCCACTCCTTCCTCCTCGTCCCTTACTTCTCCTGGAAGTACGGC 420
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 361 GCCGTGGGCCTCGTCTTCCACTCCTTCCTCCTCGTCCCTTACTTCTCCTGGAAGTACGGC 420
Qy 421 CATCGACGCCACCATTCCAACACCGGATCCCTCGAGAGGGATGAAGTGCTCGTCCCCAAG 480
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 421 CATCGACGCCACCATTCCAACACCGGATCCCTCGAGAGGGATGAAGTGCTCGTCCCCAAG 480
Qy 481 AAGAAATCCGACATCAAGTGGTACGGAAAGTACCTCAACAACCCGCTAGGACGCACGGTG 540
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 481 AAGAAATCCGACATCAAGTGGTACGGAAAGTACCTCAACAACCCGCTAGGACGCACGGTG 540
Qy 541 ATGCTAACCGTCCAGTTCACGCTCGGCTGGCCGTTGTACTTAGCCTTCAACGTCTCTGGA 600
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 541 ATGCTAACCGTCCAGTTCACGCTCGGCTGGCCGTTGTACTTAGCCTTCAACGTCTCTGGA 600
Qy 601 AGACCTTACAGCGACGGTTTCGCTTGCCATTTCCACCCGAACGCTCCCATCTACAACGAC 660
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 601 AGACCTTACAGCGACGGTTTCGCTTGCCATTTCCACCCGAACGCTCCCATCTACAACGAC 660
Qy 661 CGCGAGCGTCTCCAGATATACATCTCTGACGCTGGCGTCCTCTCCGTATGTTACGGTCTC 720
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 661 CGCGAGCGTCTCCAGATATACATCTCTGACGCTGGCGTCCTCTCCGTATGTTACGGTCTC 720
Qy 721 TACCGCTACGCTGGTTCGCGAGGAGTGGCCTCGATGGTCTGTGTCTACGGAGTTCCGCTT 780
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 721 TACCGCTACGCTGGTTCGCGAGGAGTGGCCTCGATGGTCTGTGTCTACGGAGTTCCGCTT 780
Qy 781 ATGATTGTCAACTGTTTCCTCGTCTTGATCACTTACTTGCAGCACACGCACCCTTCGCTG 840
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 781 ATGATTGTCAACTGTTTCCTCGTCTTGATCACTTACTTGCAGCACACGCACCCTTCGCTG 840
Qy 841 CCTCACTATGATTCTTCGGAGTGGGATTGGTTGAGAGGAGCTTTGGCTACTGTGGATAGA 900
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 841 CCTCACTATGATTCTTCGGAGTGGGATTGGTTGAGAGGAGCTTTGGCTACTGTGGATAGA 900
Qy 901 GACTATGGAATCTTGAACAAGGTGTTTCATAACATCACGGACACGCACGTGGCGCATCAT 960
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 901 GACTATGGAATCTTGAACAAGGTGTTTCATAACATCACGGACACGCACGTGGCGCATCAT 960
Qy 961 CTGTTCTCGACGATGCCGCATTATAACGCGATGGAAGCGACCAAGGCGATAAAGCCGATA 1020
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 961 CTGTTCTCGACGATGCCGCATTATAACGCGATGGAAGCGACCAAGGCGATAAAGCCGATA 1020
Qy 1021 CTTGGAGAGTATTACCAGTTTGATGGAACGCCGGTGGTTAAGGCGATGTGGAGGGAGGCG 1080
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1021 CTTGGAGAGTATTACCAGTTTGATGGAACGCCGGTGGTTAAGGCGATGTGGAGGGAGGCG 1080
Qy 1081 AAGGAGTGTATCTATGTTGAACCGGATAGGCAAGGTGAGAAGAAAGGTGTGTTCTGGTAC 1140
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1081 AAGGAGTGTATCTATGTTGAACCGGATAGGCAAGGTGAGAAGAAAGGTGTGTTCTGGTAC 1140
Qy 1141 AACAATAAGTTATGA 1155
|||||||||||||||
Db 1141 AACAATAAGTTATGA 1155
Against instant SEQ ID NO: 3
RESULT 1
US-09-128-602B-13
(NOTE: this sequence has 11 duplicates in the database searched.
See complete list at the end of this report)
Sequence 13, US/09128602B
Patent No. 6414223
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: Kodali, Dharma
APPLICANT: Fan, Zhegong
APPLICANT: DeBonte, Lorin R.
TITLE OF INVENTION: PLANTS, SEEDS AND OILS HAVING AN ELEVATED TOTAL MONOUNSATURATED
TITLE OF INVENTION: FATTY ACID CONTENT
CURRENT APPLICATION NUMBER: US/09/128,602B
CURRENT FILING DATE: 1998-08-03
NUMBER OF SEQ ID NOS: 68
SEQ ID NO 13
LENGTH: 1155
TYPE: DNA
ORGANISM: Brassica napus
Query Match 100.0%; Score 1155; Length 1155;
Best Local Similarity 100.0%;
Matches 1155; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 ATGGGTGCAGGTGGAAGAATGCAAGTGTCTCCTCCCTCCAAGAAGTCTGAAACCGACACC 60
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1 ATGGGTGCAGGTGGAAGAATGCAAGTGTCTCCTCCCTCCAAGAAGTCTGAAACCGACACC 60
Qy 61 ATCAAGCGCGTACCCTGCGAGACACCGCCCTTCACTGTCGGAGAACTCAAGAAAGCAATC 120
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 61 ATCAAGCGCGTACCCTGCGAGACACCGCCCTTCACTGTCGGAGAACTCAAGAAAGCAATC 120
Qy 121 CCACCGCACTGTTTCAAACGCTCGATCCCTCGCTCTTTCTCCTACCTCATCTGGGACATC 180
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 121 CCACCGCACTGTTTCAAACGCTCGATCCCTCGCTCTTTCTCCTACCTCATCTGGGACATC 180
Qy 181 ATCATAGCCTCCTGCTTCTACTACGTCGCCACCACTTACTTCCCTCTCCTCCCTCACCCT 240
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 181 ATCATAGCCTCCTGCTTCTACTACGTCGCCACCACTTACTTCCCTCTCCTCCCTCACCCT 240
Qy 241 CTCTCCTACTTCGCCTGGCCTCTCTACTGGGCCTGCCAAGGGTGCGTCCTAACCGGCGTC 300
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 241 CTCTCCTACTTCGCCTGGCCTCTCTACTGGGCCTGCCAAGGGTGCGTCCTAACCGGCGTC 300
Qy 301 TGGGTCATAGCCCACGAGTGCGGCCACCACGCCTTCAGCGACTACCAGTGGCTTGACGAC 360
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 301 TGGGTCATAGCCCACGAGTGCGGCCACCACGCCTTCAGCGACTACCAGTGGCTTGACGAC 360
Qy 361 ACCGTCGGTCTCATCTTCCACTCCTTCCTCCTCGTCCCTTACTTCTCCTGGAAGTACAGT 420
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 361 ACCGTCGGTCTCATCTTCCACTCCTTCCTCCTCGTCCCTTACTTCTCCTGGAAGTACAGT 420
Qy 421 CATCGACGCCACCATTCCAACACTGGCTCCCTCGAGAGAGACGAAGTGTTTGTCCCCAAG 480
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 421 CATCGACGCCACCATTCCAACACTGGCTCCCTCGAGAGAGACGAAGTGTTTGTCCCCAAG 480
Qy 481 AAGAAGTCAGACATCAAGTGGTACGGCAAGTACCTCAACAACCCTTTGGGACGCACCGTG 540
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 481 AAGAAGTCAGACATCAAGTGGTACGGCAAGTACCTCAACAACCCTTTGGGACGCACCGTG 540
Qy 541 ATGTTAACGGTTCAGTTCACTCTCGGCTGGCCGTTGTACTTAGCCTTCAACGTCTCGGGA 600
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 541 ATGTTAACGGTTCAGTTCACTCTCGGCTGGCCGTTGTACTTAGCCTTCAACGTCTCGGGA 600
Qy 601 AGACCTTACGACGGCGGCTTCGCTTGCCATTTCCACCCCAACGCTCCCATCTACAACGAC 660
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 601 AGACCTTACGACGGCGGCTTCGCTTGCCATTTCCACCCCAACGCTCCCATCTACAACGAC 660
Qy 661 CGCGAGCGTCTCCAGATATACATCTCCGACGCTGGCATCCTCGCCGTCTGCTACGGTCTC 720
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 661 CGCGAGCGTCTCCAGATATACATCTCCGACGCTGGCATCCTCGCCGTCTGCTACGGTCTC 720
Qy 721 TTCCGTTACGCCGCCGCGCAGGGAGTGGCCTCGATGGTCTGCTTCTACGGAGTCCCGCTT 780
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 721 TTCCGTTACGCCGCCGCGCAGGGAGTGGCCTCGATGGTCTGCTTCTACGGAGTCCCGCTT 780
Qy 781 CTGATTGTCAATGGTTTCCTCGTGTTGATCACTTACTTGCAGCACACGCATCCTTCCCTG 840
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 781 CTGATTGTCAATGGTTTCCTCGTGTTGATCACTTACTTGCAGCACACGCATCCTTCCCTG 840
Qy 841 CCTCACTACGATTCGTCCGAGTGGGATTGGTTGAGGGGAGCTTTGGCTACCGTTGACAGA 900
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 841 CCTCACTACGATTCGTCCGAGTGGGATTGGTTGAGGGGAGCTTTGGCTACCGTTGACAGA 900
Qy 901 GACTACGGAATCTTGAACAAGGTCTTCCACAATATTACCGACACGCACGTGGCGCATCAT 960
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 901 GACTACGGAATCTTGAACAAGGTCTTCCACAATATTACCGACACGCACGTGGCGCATCAT 960
Qy 961 CTGTTCTCCACGATGCCGCATTATCACGCGATGGAAGCTACCAAGGCGATAAAGCCGATA 1020
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 961 CTGTTCTCCACGATGCCGCATTATCACGCGATGGAAGCTACCAAGGCGATAAAGCCGATA 1020
Qy 1021 CTGGGAGAGTATTATCAGTTCGATGGGACGCCGGTGGTTAAGGCGATGTGGAGGGAGGCG 1080
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1021 CTGGGAGAGTATTATCAGTTCGATGGGACGCCGGTGGTTAAGGCGATGTGGAGGGAGGCG 1080
Qy 1081 AAGGAGTGTATCTATGTGGAACCGGACAGGCAAGGTGAGAAGAAAGGTGTGTTCTGGTAC 1140
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1081 AAGGAGTGTATCTATGTGGAACCGGACAGGCAAGGTGAGAAGAAAGGTGTGTTCTGGTAC 1140
Qy 1141 AACAATAAGTTATGA 1155
|||||||||||||||
Db 1141 AACAATAAGTTATGA 1155
RESULT 1
US-09-771-904-13
(NOTE: this sequence has 16 duplicates in the database searched.
Query Match 100.0%; Score 1155; Length 1155;
Best Local Similarity 100.0%;
Matches 1155; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 ATGGGTGCAGGTGGAAGAATGCAAGTGTCTCCTCCCTCCAAGAAGTCTGAAACCGACACC 60
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1 ATGGGTGCAGGTGGAAGAATGCAAGTGTCTCCTCCCTCCAAGAAGTCTGAAACCGACACC 60
Qy 61 ATCAAGCGCGTACCCTGCGAGACACCGCCCTTCACTGTCGGAGAACTCAAGAAAGCAATC 120
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 61 ATCAAGCGCGTACCCTGCGAGACACCGCCCTTCACTGTCGGAGAACTCAAGAAAGCAATC 120
Qy 121 CCACCGCACTGTTTCAAACGCTCGATCCCTCGCTCTTTCTCCTACCTCATCTGGGACATC 180
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 121 CCACCGCACTGTTTCAAACGCTCGATCCCTCGCTCTTTCTCCTACCTCATCTGGGACATC 180
Qy 181 ATCATAGCCTCCTGCTTCTACTACGTCGCCACCACTTACTTCCCTCTCCTCCCTCACCCT 240
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 181 ATCATAGCCTCCTGCTTCTACTACGTCGCCACCACTTACTTCCCTCTCCTCCCTCACCCT 240
Qy 241 CTCTCCTACTTCGCCTGGCCTCTCTACTGGGCCTGCCAAGGGTGCGTCCTAACCGGCGTC 300
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 241 CTCTCCTACTTCGCCTGGCCTCTCTACTGGGCCTGCCAAGGGTGCGTCCTAACCGGCGTC 300
Qy 301 TGGGTCATAGCCCACGAGTGCGGCCACCACGCCTTCAGCGACTACCAGTGGCTTGACGAC 360
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 301 TGGGTCATAGCCCACGAGTGCGGCCACCACGCCTTCAGCGACTACCAGTGGCTTGACGAC 360
Qy 361 ACCGTCGGTCTCATCTTCCACTCCTTCCTCCTCGTCCCTTACTTCTCCTGGAAGTACAGT 420
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 361 ACCGTCGGTCTCATCTTCCACTCCTTCCTCCTCGTCCCTTACTTCTCCTGGAAGTACAGT 420
Qy 421 CATCGACGCCACCATTCCAACACTGGCTCCCTCGAGAGAGACGAAGTGTTTGTCCCCAAG 480
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 421 CATCGACGCCACCATTCCAACACTGGCTCCCTCGAGAGAGACGAAGTGTTTGTCCCCAAG 480
Qy 481 AAGAAGTCAGACATCAAGTGGTACGGCAAGTACCTCAACAACCCTTTGGGACGCACCGTG 540
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 481 AAGAAGTCAGACATCAAGTGGTACGGCAAGTACCTCAACAACCCTTTGGGACGCACCGTG 540
Qy 541 ATGTTAACGGTTCAGTTCACTCTCGGCTGGCCGTTGTACTTAGCCTTCAACGTCTCGGGA 600
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 541 ATGTTAACGGTTCAGTTCACTCTCGGCTGGCCGTTGTACTTAGCCTTCAACGTCTCGGGA 600
Qy 601 AGACCTTACGACGGCGGCTTCGCTTGCCATTTCCACCCCAACGCTCCCATCTACAACGAC 660
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 601 AGACCTTACGACGGCGGCTTCGCTTGCCATTTCCACCCCAACGCTCCCATCTACAACGAC 660
Qy 661 CGCGAGCGTCTCCAGATATACATCTCCGACGCTGGCATCCTCGCCGTCTGCTACGGTCTC 720
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 661 CGCGAGCGTCTCCAGATATACATCTCCGACGCTGGCATCCTCGCCGTCTGCTACGGTCTC 720
Qy 721 TTCCGTTACGCCGCCGCGCAGGGAGTGGCCTCGATGGTCTGCTTCTACGGAGTCCCGCTT 780
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 721 TTCCGTTACGCCGCCGCGCAGGGAGTGGCCTCGATGGTCTGCTTCTACGGAGTCCCGCTT 780
Qy 781 CTGATTGTCAATGGTTTCCTCGTGTTGATCACTTACTTGCAGCACACGCATCCTTCCCTG 840
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 781 CTGATTGTCAATGGTTTCCTCGTGTTGATCACTTACTTGCAGCACACGCATCCTTCCCTG 840
Qy 841 CCTCACTACGATTCGTCCGAGTGGGATTGGTTGAGGGGAGCTTTGGCTACCGTTGACAGA 900
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 841 CCTCACTACGATTCGTCCGAGTGGGATTGGTTGAGGGGAGCTTTGGCTACCGTTGACAGA 900
Qy 901 GACTACGGAATCTTGAACAAGGTCTTCCACAATATTACCGACACGCACGTGGCGCATCAT 960
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 901 GACTACGGAATCTTGAACAAGGTCTTCCACAATATTACCGACACGCACGTGGCGCATCAT 960
Qy 961 CTGTTCTCCACGATGCCGCATTATCACGCGATGGAAGCTACCAAGGCGATAAAGCCGATA 1020
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 961 CTGTTCTCCACGATGCCGCATTATCACGCGATGGAAGCTACCAAGGCGATAAAGCCGATA 1020
Qy 1021 CTGGGAGAGTATTATCAGTTCGATGGGACGCCGGTGGTTAAGGCGATGTGGAGGGAGGCG 1080
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1021 CTGGGAGAGTATTATCAGTTCGATGGGACGCCGGTGGTTAAGGCGATGTGGAGGGAGGCG 1080
Qy 1081 AAGGAGTGTATCTATGTGGAACCGGACAGGCAAGGTGAGAAGAAAGGTGTGTTCTGGTAC 1140
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1081 AAGGAGTGTATCTATGTGGAACCGGACAGGCAAGGTGAGAAGAAAGGTGTGTTCTGGTAC 1140
Qy 1141 AACAATAAGTTATGA 1155
|||||||||||||||
Db 1141 AACAATAAGTTATGA 1155
One of the 16 duplicates:
US-17-040-703-2
Filing date in PALM: 2020-09-23
Sequence 2, US/17040703
Publication No. US20210010013A1
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: Cibus US LLC
APPLICANT: Cibus Europe, B.V.
TITLE OF INVENTION: FAD2 GENES AND MUTATIONS
FILE REFERENCE: 16507-20002.00
CURRENT APPLICATION NUMBER: US/17/040,703
CURRENT FILING DATE: 2020-09-23
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PCT/US2019/025881
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2019-04-04
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: US 62/652,623
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2018-04-04
NUMBER OF SEQ ID NOS: 54
SEQ ID NO 2
LENGTH: 1155
TYPE: DNA
ORGANISM: Brassica napus
Against instant SEQ ID NO: 10
SEQ ID NO: 10 is a fragment of SEQ ID NO: 1 or SEQ ID NO: 3 (positions 76-123)
Alignment statistics for match #1
Score
Expect
Identities
Gaps
Strand
89.8 bits(48)
4e-23
48/48(100%)
0/48(0%)
Plus/Plus
Query 76 TGCGAGACACCGCCCTTCACTGTCGGAGAACTCAAGAAAGCAATCCCA 123
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Sbjct 1 TGCGAGACACCGCCCTTCACTGTCGGAGAACTCAAGAAAGCAATCCCA 48
SEQ ID NO: 10 is identical in instant application and US Patent 11624072
Sequence 10, US/17259456
Patent No. 11624072
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: CELLECTIS
TITLE OF INVENTION: CANOLA WITH HIGH OLEIC ACID
FILE REFERENCE: 36861-0029WO1
CURRENT APPLICATION NUMBER: US/17/259,456
CURRENT FILING DATE: 2021-01-11
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: US 62/695,388
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2018-07-09
NUMBER OF SEQ ID NOS: 53975
SEQ ID NO 10
LENGTH: 48
TYPE: DNA
ORGANISM: Artificial
FEATURE:
OTHER INFORMATION: Target site for BnFAD2_T03
Query Match 100.0%; Score 48; Length 48;
Best Local Similarity 100.0%;
Matches 48; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 TGCGAGACACCGCCCTTCACTGTCGGAGAACTCAAGAAAGCAATCCCA 48
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1 TGCGAGACACCGCCCTTCACTGTCGGAGAACTCAAGAAAGCAATCCCA 48
SEQ ID NO: 10 against sequences in GenEmbl
DQ518277
LOCUS DQ518277 783 bp DNA linear PLN 06-DEC-2016
DEFINITION Brassica napus isolate B.nap2 delta-12 desaturase gene, partial
cds.
ACCESSION DQ518277
VERSION DQ518277.1
KEYWORDS .
SOURCE Brassica napus (rape)
ORGANISM Brassica napus
Query Match 100.0%; Score 48; DB 385; Length 783;
Best Local Similarity 100.0%;
Matches 48; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 TGCGAGACACCGCCCTTCACTGTCGGAGAACTCAAGAAAGCAATCCCA 48
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 55 TGCGAGACACCGCCCTTCACTGTCGGAGAACTCAAGAAAGCAATCCCA 102
DQ518280
LOCUS DQ518280 783 bp DNA linear PLN 06-DEC-2016
DEFINITION Brassica nigra isolate B.nig1 delta-12 desaturase gene, partial
cds.
ACCESSION DQ518280
VERSION DQ518280.1
KEYWORDS .
SOURCE Brassica nigra (black mustard)
ORGANISM Brassica nigra
Query Match 100.0%; Score 48; DB 385; Length 783;
Best Local Similarity 100.0%;
Matches 48; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 TGCGAGACACCGCCCTTCACTGTCGGAGAACTCAAGAAAGCAATCCCA 48
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 55 TGCGAGACACCGCCCTTCACTGTCGGAGAACTCAAGAAAGCAATCCCA 102
DQ518271
LOCUS DQ518271 783 bp DNA linear PLN 06-DEC-2016
DEFINITION Brassica carinata delta-12 desaturase gene, partial cds.
ACCESSION DQ518271
VERSION DQ518271.1
KEYWORDS .
SOURCE Brassica carinata
ORGANISM Brassica carinata
Query Match 100.0%; Score 48; DB 385; Length 783;
Best Local Similarity 100.0%;
Matches 48; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 TGCGAGACACCGCCCTTCACTGTCGGAGAACTCAAGAAAGCAATCCCA 48
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 55 TGCGAGACACCGCCCTTCACTGTCGGAGAACTCAAGAAAGCAATCCCA 102
DQ518282
LOCUS DQ518282 783 bp DNA linear PLN 06-DEC-2016
DEFINITION Brassica oleracea isolate B.ole1 delta-12 desaturase gene, partial
cds.
ACCESSION DQ518282
VERSION DQ518282.1
KEYWORDS .
SOURCE Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)
ORGANISM Brassica oleracea
Query Match 100.0%; Score 48; DB 385; Length 783;
Best Local Similarity 100.0%;
Matches 48; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 TGCGAGACACCGCCCTTCACTGTCGGAGAACTCAAGAAAGCAATCCCA 48
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 55 TGCGAGACACCGCCCTTCACTGTCGGAGAACTCAAGAAAGCAATCCCA 102
Conclusion
No claim is allowed.
The 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). The 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.
Contact information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WAYNE ZHONG whose telephone number is (571)270-0311. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am to 5:00pm EST.
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.
/Wayne Zhong/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 166
Prosecution Insights