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 Application /Claims/Election Applicant’s election with traverse of Group I (Claims 28-41 ) in the reply filed on 3/9/2026 is acknowledged. Applicant’s traversal is on the grounds that groups I and III should be examined together since they involve administering an inhibitor of TIM-1 and searching would only require one additional claim. This is not found persuasive because Inventions I and III are directed to related methods and are not obvious variants. Reducing B cell mediated immunosuppression and promoting T cell proliferation represent two distinct strategies for enhancing immune responses. Furthermore, the inventions as claimed do not encompass overlapping subject matter and there is nothing of record to show them to be obvious variants. Accordingly, there is a search and examination burden to search these inventions in the same application. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL . Claims 28-46 are pending. Claims 42-46 are currently withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142 (b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Claims 28-41 are the subject of the present Official action. Priority Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application CON of 16/336,635, PRO 62/399,775 and 371 of PCT/US2017/053453 filed on 3/26/2019, 9/26/2016 and 9/26/2017, respectively, under 35 U.S.C 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C 120, 121 or 365(c) is acknowledged. Accordingly, the effective priority date of the instant application is granted as 3/26/2019. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 6/27/2023 were received. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement was considered by the examiner. Claim Interpretation Independent claims 28 and 34 describe administering an inhibitor of TIGIT, PD-1, TIM-1, TIM-3, LAG-3, or CTLA-4 activity or expression. The broadest reasonable interpretation of “activity or expression” applies to each of the listed genes and not just CTLA-4. Claim Rejections - 35 USC§ 112(a) The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(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 28-41 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, for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the applicant was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. This claim rejection is supported by Freeman et al. US 2015/0210769, published 7/30/2015 (hereinafter Freeman). The claimed invention embraces the use of an inhibitor of TIGIT, PD-1, TIM-1, TIM-3, LAG-3, or CTLA-4 activity or expression in B cells. Dependent claims define either the moiety that binds the surface receptor as an antigen binding domain of an antibody specific for the B cell surface receptor/polypeptide marker OR the moiety that binds and inhibits TIGIT, PD-1, TIM-1, TIM-3, LAG-3, or CTLA-4 as an antigen binding domain of an antibody. Importantly, no claim defines BOTH moieties as antigen binding domains beyond merely reciting a genetic moiety as part of the inhibitor. Thus, all claims rejected herein recite at least one generic moiety as part of the inhibitor as the active ingredient. For each claim drawn to a genus, the written description requirement may be satisfied through sufficient description of a representative number of species by actual reduction to practice, reduction to drawings, or by disclosure of relevant identifying characteristics, i.e. structure or other physical and/or chemical properties, by functional characteristics coupled with a known or disclosed correlation between function and structure, or by a combination of such identifying characteristics, sufficient to show the applicant was in procession of the claimed genius. See Eli Lilly, 119F.3d at 1568, 43 USPQ2d at 1406. If a representative number of adequately descried species are not disclosed for a genus, the claim to that genus must be rejected as lacking adequate written description under 35 U.S.C. 112, para. 1. The claims are considered to embrace the use of an extraordinary broad variety of moieties belonging to different and in some cases unrelated classes of molecular moieties that could putatively comprise the inhibitor which comprises a multispecific binding agent. Such classes embrace by this language include the recited antigen-binding domain of an antibody that specifically recognizes any of TIGIT, PD-1, TIM-1, TIM-3, LAG-3, or CTLA-4 OR CD19, CD20 or CD22, but also includes antisense, siRNA, shRNA or any aptamer recognizing the same, any small organic molecule, dominant negative mutant, peptide/fragment inhibitor, ect . The breath of inhibitors encompassed by the instant claims is thus extraordinarily broad. The instant specification broadly and prophetically contemplates TIGIT, PD-1, TIM-1, TIM-3, LAG-3, or CTLA-4 inhibitors such as antibodies including antigen-binding portions of antibodies such as epitope or antigen binding peptides, paratopes, functional CDRs, recombinant antibodies, chimeric antibodies, tribodies , small molecules, recombinant proteins, peptides, among others. However, outside of antigen-binding domains of antibodies that specifically recognize TIGIT, PD-1, TIM-1, TIM-3, LAG-3, or CTLA-4 inhibitor CD19, CD20 or CD22 surface markers, the specification does not exemplify any or in any other manner provide a disclosure of any other such structures of binders/inhibitors. Such inhibitors are only recited generically and at a high level. It is well known by those of ordinary skill in the art that development of small molecule inhibitors, aptamers, protein fragments rely on unpredictable trial and error experimentation. Thus, the instant specification’s recitation at a high level of generic binding agents and/or inhibitors is not considered to comprise a sufficient disclosure by way of precise definition of structure, formula, chemical name or physical properties of any molecule outside of antigen-binding domains of antibodies that specifically recognize TIGIT, PD-1, TIM-1, TIM-3, LAG-3, CTLA-4, CD19, CD20 or CD22 that are capable of comprising a moiety that is part of a multispecific agent that binds and/or inhibits these targets. For example, the prior art shows that there are numerous antibodies or portions thereof capable of binding as inhibitors to PD-1, TIM-1, TIM-3, LAG-3 as shown by Freeman et al. US 2015/0210769, published 7/30/2015 (Freeman, para 62). However, none of the disclosed embodiments support the full breath of claims that encompass molecules as diverse as small molecule inhibitors and/or aptamers among many others. The examiner thus considers the combination of the instant specification and the prior art to be silent with regard to sufficient disclosure by way of structure, formula, chemical name or physical properties of any other molecule outside of antigen-binding domains of antibodies disclosed presently that might have been available at the time of applicant’s filing. Should applicant disagree, applicant is invited to point out with particularity where such examples might exist. In lack of such indication, these examples of the instant specification and prior art cannot be considered to support a finding of sufficient disclosure by way of precise definition of structure, formula, chemical name or physical properties of any molecule outside of antigen-binding domains of antibodies that specifically recognize TIGIT, PD-1, TIM-1, TIM-3, LAG-3, CTLA-4, CD19, CD20 or CD22 for inclusion in the inhibitor as required to practice the invention. Given the breadth of the genus in contrast to the largely prophetic portions of the specification , the instant specification does not adequately disclose a sufficient number of described species of the genus to support the claim to all inhibitors which bind to TIGIT, PD-1, TIM-1, TIM-3, LAG-3 or CTLA-4 in B cells , and the specification lacks adequate written description for this genus therefore. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112b 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. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claim 41 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Claim 41 describes the autoimmune or inflammatory disease or disorder accordingly to the method of claim 34. However, claim 34 only mentions a method of treating a disease or disorder involving an inappropriate immunosuppression. Thus, there is a lack of antecedent basis for the autoimmune or inflammatory disease described in claim 41. As a result of this indefinite term, one of ordinary skill in the art would not understand if the autoimmune or inflammatory disease described in claim 41 is the same or different scope to the disease or disorder involving an inappropriate immunosuppression described in claim 34. A claim is indefinite when it contains words or phrases whose meaning is unclear, see MPEP2173.05(e). Conclusion No claims allowed. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT Dr. ALEXANDER NICOL whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-6383 . The examiner can normally be reached on FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F 8-5 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, Maria Leavitt can be reached on FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-1085 . 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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. Alexander Nicol Patent Examiner Art Unit 1633 /ALEXANDER W NICOL/ Examiner, Art Unit 1634