Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/348,953

METHOD FOR BREEDING SELF-COMPATIBLE POTATOES

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Jul 07, 2023
Examiner
PAGE, BRENT T
Art Unit
1663
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Agricultural Genomics Institute AT Shenzhen Chinese Academy Of Agricultural Sciences
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
1217 granted / 1474 resolved
+22.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+10.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
1507
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.8%
-34.2% vs TC avg
§103
18.4%
-21.6% vs TC avg
§102
16.8%
-23.2% vs TC avg
§112
44.7%
+4.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1474 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-13 in the reply filed on 09/18/2025 is acknowledged. Claims 1-19 are pending. Claims 14-19 are withdrawn by the Examiner as being drawn to nonelected subject matter. Claims 1-13 are examined herein on the merits. 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. Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a), as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claims contain 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, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The claims are all drawn to a potato, potato part or potato seed comprising an S-RNase allele encoding a transcript 95% or more identical to SEQ ID NO:1 and lacking an S-RNase allele encoding a transcript 95% or more identical to SEQ ID NO:2, wherein the S-RNase allele encoding a transcript 95% or mor identical to SEQ ID NO:1 is from potato variety PG6359. In contrast, the specification only teaches potato variety PG6359 which according to the specification comprises both of the recited alleles and therefore does not meet the limitations of the claims (see Example 2 where transcript is measured for both alleles and is present). The specification does not teach any other potato let alone any other potato meeting the limitations of the instant claims. Additionally the specification does not describe how one would obtain such a potato, what starting materials would be required, and indeed the prior art is silent about what potato starting material would be lacking the ssub12 allele as described in the instant specification as SEQ ID NO:2. This is problematic because the claims further require the potato to be a self-compatible diploid potato. In an article entitled “Overcoming Self-Incompatibility in Diploid Potato Using CRISPR-Cas9”, Enciso-Rodriguez et al (2019 Frontiers in Plant Science 10:1-12) state “A significant barrier to this approach is the occurrence of gametophytic self-incompatibility (SI) in a majority of the diploid potato germplasm, thereby preventing the ability to generate diploid homozygous lines. In diploid potato, the gametophytic SI system is controlled by a single multiallelic locus called the S-locus (Porcher and Lande, 2005). This locus is composed of tightly linked genes, S-RNase (S-locus RNase) and SLFs (S-locus F-box) genes known also as S-haplotype-specific F-box brothers (SFBB), expressed in the style and pollen, respectively”. Accordingly, with tightly linked genes, unlinking the incompatible genes would be difficult. The specification does not provide any description of how to arrive at the claimed potato, nor does it describe a potato with the claimed characteristics. 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. Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claims contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. The claims are all drawn to a potato, potato part or potato seed comprising an S-RNase allele encoding a transcript 95% or more identical to SEQ ID NO:1 and lacking an S-RNase allele encoding a transcript 95% or more identical to SEQ ID NO:2, wherein the S-RNase allele encoding a transcript 95% or mor identical to SEQ ID NO:1 is from potato variety PG6359. In contrast, the specification only gives guidance to potato variety PG6359 which according to the specification comprises both of the recited alleles and therefore does not meet the limitations of the claims (see Example 2 where transcript is measured for both alleles and is present). The specification does not teach any other potato let alone any other potato meeting the limitations of the instant claims. Additionally the specification does not give guidance how one would obtain such a potato, what starting materials would be required, and indeed the prior art is silent about what potato starting material would be lacking the ssub12 allele as described in the instant specification as SEQ ID NO:2. This is problematic because the claims further require the potato to be a self-compatible diploid potato. In an article entitled “Overcoming Self-Incompatibility in Diploid Potato Using CRISPR-Cas9”, Enciso-Rodriguez et al (2019 Frontiers in Plant Science 10:1-12) state “A significant barrier to this approach is the occurrence of gametophytic self-incompatibility (SI) in a majority of the diploid potato germplasm, thereby preventing the ability to generate diploid homozygous lines. In diploid potato, the gametophytic SI system is controlled by a single multiallelic locus called the S-locus (Porcher and Lande, 2005). This locus is composed of tightly linked genes, S-RNase (S-locus RNase) and SLFs (S-locus F-box) genes known also as S-haplotype-specific F-box brothers (SFBB), expressed in the style and pollen, respectively”. Accordingly, with tightly linked genes, unlinking the incompatible genes would be difficult. Given the state of the art, the lack of working examples, the lack of starting material, and the unpredictability in the art as described by Eciso-Rodriguez et al as mentioned above, it would be undue experimentation for one of skill in the art to arrive at the instantly claimed potato without the starting material or guidance of how to break linkage of the two incompatible loci, No claims are allowed. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRENT T PAGE whose telephone number is (571)272-5914. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7-4 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, Amjad Abraham can be reached at 5712707058. 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. /BRENT T PAGE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1663
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 07, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600980
NOVEL DISEASE RESISTANT MELON PLANTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600975
COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR MODIFYING GENOMES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599098
SOYBEAN CULTIVAR 22140806
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12593765
SIMULTANEOUS GENE EDITING AND HAPLOID INDUCTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593787
PLANTS AND SEEDS OF CORN VARIETY CV989440
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
83%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+10.6%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1474 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