Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/299,121

SYSTEMS, METHODS AND COMPOSITION OF USING RNASE III MUTANTS TO PRODUCE SRNA TO CONTROL HOST PATHOGEN INFECTION

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Apr 12, 2023
Examiner
WHITEMAN, BRIAN A
Art Unit
1636
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Pebble Labs Inc.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
85%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allow Rate
775 granted / 1138 resolved
+8.1% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+17.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
50 currently pending
Career history
1188
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.9%
-34.1% vs TC avg
§103
29.7%
-10.3% vs TC avg
§102
20.7%
-19.3% vs TC avg
§112
24.6%
-15.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1138 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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 9/11/25 has been entered. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-9, filed 9/11/25, with respect to 112 and 103 rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 1-3 and 5-21 has been withdrawn because of the amendment to claim 1 and 19. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of the amendment to claim 1. Claim 1 of 11800872 recites: A genetically modified cell expressing a heterologous polynucleotide sequence operably linked to a promoter sequence encoding an RNase III mutant from E. coli or Enterobacter adapted for enhanced generation of small RNA (sRNA) from catalytic cutting of double stranded RNA (dsRNA), wherein said RNase III mutant comprises: an E38A-R107A-R108A RNase III mutant, wherein a glutamic acid is replaced with an alanine at residue 38, and an arginine is replaced with an alanine at residue 107, and an arginine is replaced with an alanine at residue 108, or a homologous RNase III mutant thereof, wherein the homologous RNase III's wild-type sequence includes the conserved residues E38, R107 and R108. The amended claims are broader than what was recited in the claims of the granted patent ‘872. Drawings The drawings were received on 9/11/25. These drawings are acceptable. There are now no color drawings of record. 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 1-3, 5-7, and 9-20 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 claimed invention embraces a genetically modified bacteria engineered to co-express a heterologous bacterial RNase III mutant and a heterologous target dsRNA molecule, wherein the mutant is derived from a wild type RNase Ill from a bacteria selected from the group consisting of: E. coli, Enterobacter sp., Bacillus sp., S. enterica, P. aeruginosa, C. burnetii, R. capsulatus, S. coelicolor, C. jejuni, H. pylori, S. aureus, and L. lactis, wherein the heterologous bacterial RNase III mutant is a triple or quadruple mutant set for in instant claim 1. Original claim 8 (now cancelled) listed the bacteria set forth in amended claim 1. Pages 51-52 of the specification provide a definition for the term “RNase III”. The invention includes residues 38, 65, 107 and 108 and their corresponding residues across various homologous RNase III proteins or homologs. The amino acids positions may vary between RNase III enzymes from different sources. For example, E38 in E. coli corresponds to E37 in Aquifex aeolicus. The specification has written support for E. coli and Enterobacter sp. A search of the prior art does not disclose that the other bacteria listed in the claim would have the same RNase III mutants, E38A, E65A, R107A, R108A. The claims require the mutation at these specific sites of an amino acid sequence of the bacteria listed in the claims. Thus, if a skilled artisan made these mutations at the same amino acid residues of E. coli or Enterobacter in other the bacteria it might not result in the desired biological activity. Since amino acid positions may vary between RNase III enzymes from the species of bacteria recited in the instant claims (pages 51-52 of the specification). The description of E. coli and Enterbacter does not represent the other species listed in claim 1. In addition, in view of the variability between RNase III mutants, E. coli and Enterobacter sp do not adequately describe and represent the different species of bacteria listed in claim 1. It would require further experimentation (not undue) to determine if the residues of mutations are actually in the other bacteria or conserved residues that are homologous to the specific mutations claimed. It is acknowledged that identifying homologs mutants is well within the scope of a skilled artisan and there are several widely-available (and commonly used) tools and databases that can be used to find homologous protein sequences and identify their conserved regions. However, this does not provide written support for instant claim 1 and claims dependent therefrom because adequate written description of RNase mutants set forth instant claim 1 is not based on tools that are routine and conventional in the prior art to determine which amino acids, if any, correspond to the RNase III mutants set forth in S. enterica, P. aeruginosa, C. burnetii, R. capsulatus, S. coelicolor, C. jejuni, H. pylori, S. aureus, and L. lactis. See Amgen v. Sanofi, 872 F.3d 1367 (Fed. Cir. 2017) in MPEP 2163. For the reasons set forth above, the limited description in the specification does not provide written support for RNase III mutants from Bacillus sp., S. enterica, P. aeruginosa, C. burnetii, R. capsulatus, S. coelicolor, C. jejuni, H. pylori, S. aureus, and L. lactis. In view of the foregoing, it is clear that the specification of the instant disclosure fails to convey to the skilled artisan that the applicant had possession of the claimed genus of RNase III mutants derived a bacteria selected from the group set forth in instant claim 1 and claims dependent therefrom. Conclusion See attached PTO-326 for disposition of claims. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Brian Whiteman whose telephone number is (571)272-0764. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday thru Friday; 6:00 AM to 3:00PM. 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, Neil Hammell can be reached at (571)-270-5919. 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. /BRIAN WHITEMAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1636
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 12, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 16, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §112
May 20, 2025
Response Filed
Jun 10, 2025
Final Rejection — §112
Aug 11, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 11, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 02, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 04, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595478
CRISPR-CAS SYSTEMS HAVING DESTABILIZATION DOMAIN
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12577568
METHODS FOR CONTROLLING EXTRACORPOREAL MEMBRANE OXYGENATION (ECMO) COAGULATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577562
Treatment Of Glaucoma With Rho Guanine Nucleotide Exchange Factor 12 (ARHGEF12) Inhibitors
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12570984
DNA APTAMER SPECIFICALLY BINDING TO GLUTATHIONE AND USE THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12571004
EXOSOMAL LOADING USING HYDROPHOBICALLY MODIFIED OLIGONUCLEOTIDES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
68%
Grant Probability
85%
With Interview (+17.0%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1138 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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