DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
Status of the Application
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-9 are pending in the application and are being examined on the merits.
Priority
This application claims foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) to European application no. 22176769.2 filed June 1, 2022. A certified copy of the foreign priority document has been filed in this application on October 16, 2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on September 29, 2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS has been considered by the examiner.
Specification/Informalities
The use of trade names or marks used in commerce, have been noted in this application, e.g., “Megazyme,” “Alcosperse,” “Aquatreat,” “Acumer,” “Acusol,” and “Pluronic” at pp. 2, 6, 7, and 11 of the specification. All instances of trade names or marks should be accompanied by the generic terminology and capitalized wherever they appear or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term.
Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks.
Claim Objections
Claim 6 is objected to in the recitation of “90% identity to sequence ID no. 1” and in the interest of improving claim form and using a proper sequence identifier, it is suggested that the noted phrase be amended to recite “90% sequence identity to the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NO: 1.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 3, 4, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 3, 4, and 6 are indefinite in the recitation of “about.” The term “about” is a term of degree and the examiner has reviewed the specification and can find no examples or teachings that can be used for ascertaining the variance intended by the term “about.” Moreover, there is nothing in the specification or prior art of record to indicate that one of ordinary skill in the art could have ascertain the scope of the recited degree. It is suggested that applicant clarify the meaning of the claims. See MPEP 2173.05(b).III regarding the term “about.”
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public 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 1-3, 5, and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Skagerlind, J. P. (WO 2015/144782 A1; cited on the IDS filed September 29, 2023; hereafter “Skagerlind”).
Claim 1 is drawn to a dishwashing detergent composition comprising a xylanase and a sulphonated carboxylate polymer;
claim 2 is drawn to the composition according to claim 1, wherein the sulphonated carboxylate polymer comprises a sulphonated acrylic polymer and/or a sulphonated acrylic/maleic polymer;
claim 3 is drawn to the composition according to claim 1, further comprising an ethylene oxide-propylene oxide block copolymer having a cloud point of about 20°C or greater than about 20°C;
claim 5 is drawn to the composition according to claim 1, wherein the dishwashing detergent composition is in the form of a unit dose pouch;
claim 7 is drawn to the composition according to claim 1, wherein the xylanase is selected from glycosyl hydrolases from GH family 10 and/or 11;
claim 8 is drawn to the composition according to claim 1, further comprising a bleach catalyst; and
claim 9 is drawn to the composition according to claim 1, further comprising a chelant.
Regarding instant claim 1, Skagerlind teaches a dishwashing composition comprising enzymes capable of degrading cellulosic material including an Aspergillus fumigatus xylanase or homolog thereof (claim 5 of Skagerlind). Skagerlind teaches the dishwashing composition comprises a polymer (p. 16, lines 1-3) and teaches sulfonated/carboxylated polymers are particularly suitable for the compositions contained in a pouch (p. 28, lines 7-8).
Regarding instant claim 2, Skagerlind teaches preferred commercially available polymers include Acusol 588G (p. 30, lines 3-5). Acusol 588G is a copolymer of acrylic acid and 2-acrylamido-2-methylpropane sulfonic acid monomers and is a “sulphonated acrylic polymer.”
Regarding instant claim 3, Skagerlind teaches the composition includes at least one non-ionic surfactant (p. 25, line 27). Skagerlind teaches suitable non-ionic surfactants include low-foaming nonionic (LFNI) surfactants for improved water-sheeting action (p. 25, lines 27-28) including a block polyoxyethylene-polyoxypropylene polymer (p. 26, lines 2-5). Skagerlind teaches LFNI surfactant has a cloud point below 30oC (p. 26, line 21), which is within the range of “having a cloud point of…greater than about 20oC.”
Regarding instant claim 5, Skagerlind teaches the composition is in the form of a pouch (p. 18, lines 31-32).
Regarding instant claim 7, Skagerlind teaches the composition comprises Aspergillus fumigatus GH10 xylanase (p. 23, lines 10-11 and 15-16).
Regarding instant claim 8, Skagerlind teaches the composition contains a bleach catalyst (p. 2, lines 14-15; 52, lines 32-34).
Regarding instant claim 9, Skagerlind teaches the composition contains a detergent builder or co-builder, which may particularly be a chelating agent (p. 31, lines 1-6).
Therefore, Skagerlind anticipates claims 1-3, 5, and 7-9 as written.
Alternatively, in view of the cited teachings of Skagerlind, the dishwashing detergent composition of claims 1-3, 5, and 7-9 would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date. One would have been motivated and expected success to make the dishwashing detergent composition of claims 1-3, 5, and 7-9 because of the explicit teachings of Skagerlind as set forth above.
Therefore, claims 1-3, 5, and 7-9 are anticipated by or, in the alternative, are obvious in view of Skagerlind.
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.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Skagerlind in view of Man et al. (WO 2018/136719 A1; cited on the attached Form PTO-892; hereafter “Man”).
Claim 4 is drawn to the composition according to claim 3, wherein the ethylene oxide-propylene oxide block copolymer is a triblock copolymer having one of the following structures:
EOx1 POy1 EOx2 (I)
POy2 EOx3 POy3 (II)
wherein each of x1, x2 and x3 is independently in the range of from about 1 to about 50, and each of y1, y2 and y3 is independently in the range of from about 10 to about 70.
The relevant teachings of Skagerlind as applied to claims 1-3, 5, and 7-9 are set forth above.
Skagerlind does not teach a triblock copolymer as recited in claim 4.
Man teaches defoaming agents that contribute to sheeting performance including nonionic ethylene oxide containing surfactants (p. 19, lines 22-28). Man teaches examples of ethylene oxide derivative surfactants that may be used as defoamers include polyoxyethylene-polyoxypropylene block copolymers with the formulae (EO)x(PO)y(EO)x and (PO)y(EO)x(PO)y with x being in the range of 10 to 130 and y being in the range of 15 to 70 (p. 19, line 31 to p. 21, line 4). The ranges of x and y taught by Man overlap with the ranges of x and y recited in claim 4 and according to MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art a prima facie case of obviousness exists.
In view of the combined teachings of Skagerlind and Man, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use the exemplary polyoxyethylene-polyoxypropylene block copolymers with the formulae (EO)x(PO)y(EO)x and (PO)y(EO)x(PO)y of Man in the dishwashing detergent composition of Skagerlind. One would have been motivated and would have expected success to do this because Skagerlind teaches low-foaming nonionic surfactants for improved water-sheeting action including a block polyoxyethylene-polyoxypropylene polymer, and Man teaches exemplary polyoxyethylene-polyoxypropylene block copolymers with the formulae (EO)x(PO)y(EO)x and (PO)y(EO)x(PO)y as defoaming agents that contribute to sheeting performance. Man does not expressly teach the exemplary polyoxyethylene-polyoxypropylene block copolymers have a cloud point of about 20°C or greater than about 20°C. However, according to MPEP 2112.01, when the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent, and since the structures of the exemplary polyoxyethylene-polyoxypropylene block copolymers of Man are substantially identical to the structures recited in claim 4, it is presumed that the exemplary polyoxyethylene-polyoxypropylene block copolymers of Man have a cloud point of about 20°C or greater than about 20°C. Therefore, the composition of claim 4 would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Skagerlind in view of Sibbesen et al. (WO 2010/072225 A1; cited on the attached Form PTO-892; hereafter “Sibbesen”).
Claim 6 is drawn to the composition according to claim 1, wherein the xylanase has an amino acid sequence having at least about 90% identity to sequence ID no. 1.
The relevant teachings of Skagerlind as applied to claims 1-3, 5, and 7-9 are set forth above.
Skagerlind does not teach a xylanase having an amino acid sequence having at least about 90% identity to SEQ ID NO: 1.
Sibbesen teaches a xylanase comprising the sequence of SEQ ID NO: 11 (p. 80, lines 15-21) and teaches xylanase as a component of a dishwashing detergent (p. 8, lines 8-11). SEQ ID NO: 11 of Sibbesen is identical to instant SEQ ID NO: 1 (see attached Appendix A for sequence alignment).
In view of the combined teachings of Skagerlind and Sibbesen, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Skagerlind’s dishwashing detergent composition by substituting the xylanase with the xylanase of Sibbesen. One of ordinary skill would have expected success and could have substituted the xylanase of Skagerlind’s dishwashing detergent composition with the xylanase of Sibbesen because Sibbesen taught the xylanase as a component of a dishwashing detergent. One of ordinary skill would have found it obvious to make the substitution because, based on the relevant teachings of Skagerlind and Sibbesen, an ordinarily skilled artisan would have predicted that the xylanase of Sibbesen is suitable for use in Skagerlind’s dishwashing detergent composition. Therefore, the composition of claim 6 would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1 and 5-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. Applicant’s attention is directed to the "Guidance for Determining Subject Matter Eligibility Of Claims Reciting Or Involving Laws of Nature, Natural Phenomena, & Natural Products”, released on December 16, 2014.
Claim Interpretation: Claim 1 is drawn to a dishwashing detergent composition comprising a xylanase and a sulphonated carboxylate polymer.
The recitation of “dishwashing detergent” in the preamble of claim 1 is interpreted as intended use or purpose of the claimed composition and does not further limit the structure and/or function of the claimed composition. The only required components of the claimed composition are “a xylanase,” which encompasses a naturally occurring xylanase, and “a sulphonated carboxylate polymer,” which encompasses a naturally occurring sulphonated carboxylate polymer such as lignin sulfonate.
claim 5 is drawn to the composition according to claim 1, wherein the dishwashing detergent composition is in the form of a unit dose pouch.
Claim 6 is drawn to the composition according to claim 1, wherein the xylanase has an amino acid sequence having at least about 90% identity to sequence ID no. 1.
The recited xylanase of claim 6 encompasses a naturally-occurring xylanase such as a xylanase from Bacillus sp. NCL 87-6-10 (disclosed by UniProt Database Accession Number G4XQK1, February 2025, 2 pages; cited on the attached Form PTO-892), the sequence of which has 99.7% sequence identity to instant SEQ ID NO: 1 (see attached Appendix B for sequence alignment).
Claim 7 is drawn to the composition according to claim 1, wherein the xylanase is selected from glycosyl hydrolases from GH family 10 and/or 11.
The recited xylanase of claim 7 encompasses a naturally-occurring xylanase such as a xylanase from Bacillus sp. NCL 87-6-10, which belongs to GH11 (disclosed by UniProt Database Accession Number G4XQK1, February 2025, 2 pages; cited on the attached Form PTO-892).
Claim 8 is drawn to the composition according to claim 1, further comprising a bleach catalyst.
The recited bleach catalyst of claim 8 encompasses a naturally-occurring bleach catalyst such as a peroxidase.
Claim 9 is drawn to the composition according to claim 1, further comprising a chelant.
The recited bleach catalyst of claim 8 encompasses a naturally-occurring chelant such as chlorophyll.
Given a broadest reasonable interpretation, the claimed dishwashing detergent composition encompasses a composition of naturally occurring components.
Patent Eligibility Analysis Step 1: The claims are drawn to a composition of matter, which is one of the statutory categories of invention.
Patent Eligibility Analysis Step 2A Prong 1: The claims recite a combination of naturally occurring components, which is considered to be a law of nature or a natural phenomenon (a natural product). There is no evidence of record of a naturally occurring counterpart to the claimed combination, so the combination is compared to the individual components as they occur in nature (see MPEP 2106.04(c).II.A). There is no indication in the specification or evidence of record that the individual components have any characteristics (structural, functional, or otherwise) that are different from the corresponding individual components as each occurs in nature. Furthermore, there is no indication in the specification or evidence of record that combining these components changes the structure, function, or other properties of the naturally occurring components. In other words, the overall combination of components does not render the resulting composition different from each of the individual components. Thus, the “dishwashing detergent composition” of claims 1 and 5-9 is not considered to have markedly different characteristics from what occurs in nature, and is considered to be a “product of nature” exception. Accordingly, the “dishwashing detergent composition” of claims 1 and 5-9 is directed to a judicial exception.
Patent Eligibility Analysis Step 2A Prong 2: Regarding claims 1 and 6-9, there are no additional elements recited in the claims beyond the judicial exception. Regarding claim 5, the recitation of “in the form of a unit dose pouch” is not considered to be a markedly different characteristic because there is no evidence of record that being in “the form of a unit dose pouch” changes the structure, function, or other properties of the naturally occurring components.
Patent Eligibility Analysis Step 2B: The claims only recite the products of nature, without more and do not include any additional elements that could add significantly more to the judicial exception.
As such, the claims do not qualify as eligible subject matter. For these reasons the claim is rejected under section 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claim Rejections - 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 conflicting claims 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); 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 nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) 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 www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-9 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-9 of co-pending application 18/325,470 (reference application).
Regarding instant claims 1 and 3, claim 1 of the reference application recites a dishwashing detergent composition comprising a xylanase and an ethylene oxide-propylene oxide block copolymer having a cloud point of about 20°C or greater than about 20°C, and
claim 3 of the reference application recites the composition according to claim 1, further comprising a sulphonated carboxylate polymer.
Regarding instant claim 2, claim 4 of the reference application recites the composition according to claim 3, wherein the sulphonated carboxylate polymer comprises a sulphonated acrylic polymer and/or a sulphonated acrylic/maleic polymer.
Regarding instant claim 4, claim 2 of the reference application recites the composition according to claim 1, wherein the ethylene oxide-propylene oxide block copolymer comprises a triblock copolymer and having one of the following structures:
EOx1 POy1 EOx2 (I)
POy2 EOx3 POy3 (II)
wherein each of x1, x2 and x3 is independently in the range of from about 1 to about 50, and each of y1, y2 and y3 is independently in the range of from about 10 to about 70.
Regarding instant claim 5, claim 5 of the reference application recites the composition according to claim 1, wherein the dishwashing detergent composition is in the form of a unit dose pouch.
Regarding instant claim 6, claim 6 of the reference application recites the composition according to claim 1, wherein the xylanase has an amino acid sequence having at least about 90% identity to sequence ID no. 1. SEQ ID NO: 1 of this application is identical to SEQ ID NO: 1 of the reference application.
Regarding instant claim 7, claim 7 of the reference application recites the composition according to claim 1, wherein the xylanase is selected from glycosyl hydrolases from GH family 10 and/or 11.
Regarding instant claim 8, claim 8 of the reference application recites the composition according to claim 1, further comprising a bleach catalyst.
Regarding instant claim 9, claim 9 of the reference application recites the composition according to claim 1, further comprising a chelant.
Therefore, claims 1-9 of this application are unpatentable over claims 1-9 of the reference application. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Conclusion
Status of the claims:
Claims 1-9 are pending.
Claims 1-9 are rejected.
No claim is in condition for allowance.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID J STEADMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-0942. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 7:30 AM to 4:00 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, MANJUNATH N RAO can be reached on 571-272-0939. 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.
/David Steadman/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1656
APPENDIX A
AYE39709
ID AYE39709 standard; protein; 248 AA.
XX
AC AYE39709;
XX
DT 02-SEP-2010 (first entry)
XX
DE Novel polypeptide related protein sequence, SEQ ID 11.
XX
KW baking; cell disintegration; cereal; cheese; degradation; ethanol;
KW feedstuff; food; meat; milk; paper; prebiotic; pulp; starch; surfactant.
XX
OS Unidentified.
XX
CC PN WO2010072225-A1.
XX
CC PD 01-JUL-2010.
XX
CC PF 23-DEC-2009; 2009WO-DK050352.
XX
PR 23-DEC-2008; 2008EP-00172755.
PR 21-JAN-2009; 2009US-0146170P.
XX
CC PA (DASC ) DANISCO AS.
XX
CC PI Sibbesen O, Sorensen JF;
XX
DR WPI; 2010-H49023/44.
DR GENBANK; CAB42305.
XX
CC PT New polypeptide having xylanase activity and containing amino acid
CC PT sequence used in e.g. cellulosic bio-ethanol production, where the
CC PT polypeptide has amino acid modification at specific positions.
XX
CC PS Claim 1; SEQ ID NO 11; 112pp; English.
XX
CC The present invention relates to a novel polypeptide (see AYE39699-
CC AYE39720) having xylanase activity. The polypeptide of the invention has:
CC increased xylanase activity, bran solubilization and thermostability as
CC compared to the corresponding wild type enzyme to retain its activity
CC after heat treatment; and improved aroma, flavor, mildness, consistency,
CC texture, body, mouth feel, firmness, viscosity, gel fracture, structure
CC and organoleptic properties of products for consumption. The polypeptide
CC of the invention can be used: in agricultural by-products (e.g., cereal
CC bran, cellulosic bio-ethanol production, starch production and
CC liquefaction, flour separation, and animal feed); in the production of
CC prebiotics, paper and pulp production; and cleaning composition (e.g.,
CC laundry detergent composition); in the preparation of food products
CC (e.g., jams, marmalades, jellies, milk and cheese, meat products, poultry
CC products, fish products, bakery products, soft drinks, fruit juice,
CC beverage); and in the degradation or modification of a plant cell wall.
CC The present sequence is a novel polypeptide related protein sequence,
CC used in the multiple sequence alignment of proteins having xylanase
CC activity.
XX
SQ Sequence 248 AA;
Query Match 100.0%; Score 1335; Length 248;
Best Local Similarity 100.0%;
Matches 248; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 MRQKKLTFILAFLVCFALTLPAEIIQAQIVTDNSIGNHDGYDYEFWKDSGGSGTMILNHG 60
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1 MRQKKLTFILAFLVCFALTLPAEIIQAQIVTDNSIGNHDGYDYEFWKDSGGSGTMILNHG 60
Qy 61 GTFSAQWNNVNNILFRKGKKFNETQTHQQVGNMSINYGANFQPNGNAYLCVYGWTVDPLV 120
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 61 GTFSAQWNNVNNILFRKGKKFNETQTHQQVGNMSINYGANFQPNGNAYLCVYGWTVDPLV 120
Qy 121 EYYIVDSWGNWRPPGATPKGTITVDGGTYDIYETLRVNQPSIKGIATFKQYWSVRRSKRT 180
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 121 EYYIVDSWGNWRPPGATPKGTITVDGGTYDIYETLRVNQPSIKGIATFKQYWSVRRSKRT 180
Qy 181 SGTISVSNHFRAWENLGMNMGKMYEVALTVEGYQSSGSANVYSNTLRINGNPLSTISNDK 240
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 181 SGTISVSNHFRAWENLGMNMGKMYEVALTVEGYQSSGSANVYSNTLRINGNPLSTISNDK 240
Qy 241 SITLDKNN 248
||||||||
Db 241 SITLDKNN 248
APPENDIX B
G4XQK1_9BACI
ID G4XQK1_9BACI Unreviewed; 248 AA.
AC G4XQK1;
DT 14-DEC-2011, integrated into UniProtKB/TrEMBL.
DT 14-DEC-2011, sequence version 1.
DT 05-FEB-2025, entry version 41.
DE RecName: Full=Endo-1,4-beta-xylanase {ECO:0000256|ARBA:ARBA00012590, ECO:0000256|PROSITE-ProRule:PRU01097};
DE EC=3.2.1.8 {ECO:0000256|ARBA:ARBA00012590, ECO:0000256|PROSITE-ProRule:PRU01097};
DE Flags: Fragment;
GN Name=xylC3 {ECO:0000313|EMBL:AEP40124.1};
OS Bacillus sp. NCL 87-6-10.
OC Bacteria; Bacillati; Bacillota; Bacilli; Bacillales; Bacillaceae; Bacillus.
OX NCBI_TaxID=1090922 {ECO:0000313|EMBL:AEP40124.1};
RN [1] {ECO:0000313|EMBL:AEP40124.1}
RP NUCLEOTIDE SEQUENCE.
RC STRAIN=NCL 87-6-10 {ECO:0000313|EMBL:AEP40124.1};
RA Sharma P., Rele M.V., Kumar L.S.;
RL Submitted (APR-2011) to the EMBL/GenBank/DDBJ databases.
CC -!- CATALYTIC ACTIVITY:
CC Reaction=Endohydrolysis of (1->4)-beta-D-xylosidic linkages in xylans.;
CC EC=3.2.1.8; Evidence={ECO:0000256|ARBA:ARBA00000681,
CC ECO:0000256|PROSITE-ProRule:PRU01097, ECO:0000256|RuleBase:RU362015};
CC -!- PATHWAY: Glycan degradation; xylan degradation.
CC {ECO:0000256|ARBA:ARBA00004851, ECO:0000256|PROSITE-ProRule:PRU01097,
CC ECO:0000256|RuleBase:RU362015}.
CC -!- SIMILARITY: Belongs to the glycosyl hydrolase 11 (cellulase G) family.
CC {ECO:0000256|PROSITE-ProRule:PRU01097, ECO:0000256|RuleBase:RU362015}.
CC ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC Copyrighted by the UniProt Consortium, see https://www.uniprot.org/terms
CC Distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) License
CC ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DR EMBL; JF895184; AEP40124.1; -; Genomic_DNA.
DR AlphaFoldDB; G4XQK1; -.
DR UniPathway; UPA00114; -.
DR GO; GO:0031176; F:endo-1,4-beta-xylanase activity; IEA:UniProtKB-UniRule.
DR GO; GO:0045493; P:xylan catabolic process; IEA:UniProtKB-UniRule.
DR Gene3D; 2.60.120.180; -; 1.
DR InterPro; IPR013320; ConA-like_dom_sf.
DR InterPro; IPR013319; GH11/12.
DR InterPro; IPR018208; GH11_AS_1.
DR InterPro; IPR033119; GH11_AS_2.
DR InterPro; IPR033123; GH11_dom.
DR InterPro; IPR001137; Glyco_hydro_11.
DR PANTHER; PTHR46828; ENDO-1,4-BETA-XYLANASE A-RELATED; 1.
DR PANTHER; PTHR46828:SF2; ENDO-1,4-BETA-XYLANASE A-RELATED; 1.
DR Pfam; PF00457; Glyco_hydro_11; 1.
DR PRINTS; PR00911; GLHYDRLASE11.
DR SUPFAM; SSF49899; Concanavalin A-like lectins/glucanases; 1.
DR PROSITE; PS00776; GH11_1; 1.
DR PROSITE; PS00777; GH11_2; 1.
DR PROSITE; PS51761; GH11_3; 1.
PE 3: Inferred from homology;
KW Carbohydrate metabolism {ECO:0000256|ARBA:ARBA00023277,
KW ECO:0000256|PROSITE-ProRule:PRU01097};
KW Glycosidase {ECO:0000256|ARBA:ARBA00023295, ECO:0000256|PROSITE-
KW ProRule:PRU01097};
KW Hydrolase {ECO:0000256|ARBA:ARBA00022801, ECO:0000256|PROSITE-
KW ProRule:PRU01097};
KW Polysaccharide degradation {ECO:0000256|ARBA:ARBA00023326,
KW ECO:0000256|PROSITE-ProRule:PRU01097}; Signal {ECO:0000256|SAM:SignalP};
KW Xylan degradation {ECO:0000256|ARBA:ARBA00022651, ECO:0000256|PROSITE-
KW ProRule:PRU01097}.
FT SIGNAL 1..27
FT /evidence="ECO:0000256|SAM:SignalP"
FT CHAIN 28..248
FT /note="Endo-1,4-beta-xylanase"
FT /evidence="ECO:0000256|SAM:SignalP"
FT /id="PRO_5003471010"
FT DOMAIN 29..224
FT /note="GH11"
FT /evidence="ECO:0000259|PROSITE:PS51761"
FT ACT_SITE 121
FT /note="Nucleophile"
FT /evidence="ECO:0000256|PROSITE-ProRule:PRU01097"
FT ACT_SITE 211
FT /note="Proton donor"
FT /evidence="ECO:0000256|PROSITE-ProRule:PRU01097"
FT NON_TER 248
FT /evidence="ECO:0000313|EMBL:AEP40124.1"
SQ SEQUENCE 248 AA; 27759 MW; 2946A5C4118AE8D5 CRC64;
Query Match 99.7%; Score 1331; Length 248;
Best Local Similarity 99.6%;
Matches 247; Conservative 1; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 MRQKKLTFILAFLVCFALTLPAEIIQAQIVTDNSIGNHDGYDYEFWKDSGGSGTMILNHG 60
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1 MRQKKLTFILAFLVCFALTLPAEIIQAQIVTDNSIGNHDGYDYEFWKDSGGSGTMILNHG 60
Qy 61 GTFSAQWNNVNNILFRKGKKFNETQTHQQVGNMSINYGANFQPNGNAYLCVYGWTVDPLV 120
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 61 GTFSAQWNNVNNILFRKGKKFNETQTHQQVGNMSINYGANFQPNGNAYLCVYGWTVDPLV 120
Qy 121 EYYIVDSWGNWRPPGATPKGTITVDGGTYDIYETLRVNQPSIKGIATFKQYWSVRRSKRT 180
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 121 EYYIVDSWGNWRPPGATPKGTITVDGGTYDIYETLRVNQPSIKGIATFKQYWSVRRSKRT 180
Qy 181 SGTISVSNHFRAWENLGMNMGKMYEVALTVEGYQSSGSANVYSNTLRINGNPLSTISNDK 240
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||:
Db 181 SGTISVSNHFRAWENLGMNMGKMYEVALTVEGYQSSGSANVYSNTLRINGNPLSTISNDE 240
Qy 241 SITLDKNN 248
||||||||
Db 241 SITLDKNN 248