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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of the invention of Group I, claims 1-14, in the reply filed on 06/09/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claim Status
The amendment of 06/09/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-29 are pending in this US patent application. Claims 15-29 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 06/09/2026.
Claims 1-14 are currently under examination and were examined on their merits.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements filed in this application have been received and considered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-8 and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by El Kadri et al., RSC Adv. 6: 93694 (2016), as evidenced by Czerniak et al., Proc. Nat’l. Acad. Sci. USA 119(4): e2119235119 (2022).
El Kadri teaches the presence of E. coli in water-in-oil-in-water emulsions (see entire document, including page 1, abstract; reads on claims 1-8 and 12-14; the Examiner notes that the instant claims require only the presence of RNA polymerase and DNA, both of which will be found in any living cell, along with an aqueous medium and a non-aqueous medium in a composition, and the claims do not preclude the inclusion of any particular ingredients; the emulsion of El Kadri contains water and E. coli [water is an aqueous medium, and the inside of an E. coli cell also contains an aqueous medium] and oil [a non-aqueous medium] present as an emulsion, which would intrinsically require at least one interface [reads on claim 3] between a water molecule and an oil molecule; the plasma membrane of E. coli is a pervious membrane that separates the aqueous cytosol from the non-aqueous medium [reads on claims 6-7], and at least one molecule of RNA polymerase present in the cytosol of E. coli will contact the plasma membrane for at least some period of time; the Examiner notes that claim 8 requires no type of immobilization or length of time that said immobilization must exist). The E. coli-containing emulsions were subjected to alterations in hypo-osmotic pressure, leading to release of the cells from the emulsion (page 4, right column, paragraph 2; reads on claims 13-14; the Examiner notes that releasing the cells from the water-in-oil-in-water emulsion of El Kadri intrinsically requires moving the cells from water, the aqueous medium, through oil, a non-aqueous medium, in order to be released from the emulsion, thus reading on claim 13; the cells are also ‘susceptible’ to the osmotic pressure source because they are forced out of the emulsion, and so all components within the cell are likewise ‘susceptible’ to the pressure source, including all nucleotides that serve as substrates for RNA polymerase, thus reading on claim 14, which does not provide any limitation of what constitutes a species being ‘susceptible to’ the force source).
Czerniak teaches that guanine is responsible for RNA-lipid binding (see entire document, including page 1, abstract). As such, the guanine intrinsically present in the E. coli of El Kadri is intrinsically capable of being incorporated into RNA by RNA polymerases, is intrinsically ‘reactive’ because it can be incorporated into RNA, and is capable of reacting in at least some manner with fatty acid-containing lipids (reads on claim 12).
Therefore, claims 1-8 and 12-14 are anticipated by El Kadri, as evidenced by Czerniak, and are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1).
Claims 1-3 and 6-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Okabe et al., Euro. Biophys. J. 49: 71-84 (2020).
Okabe teaches compositions comprising E. coli, aqueous NaCl solutions, DPPC, and chloroform (see entire document, including page 72, right column, paragraphs 2-3; page 73, left column, paragraphs 2-4; reads on claims 1-3 and 6-11; the Examiner notes that the instant claims require only the presence of RNA polymerase and DNA, both of which will be found in any living cell, along with an aqueous medium and a non-aqueous medium in a composition, and the claims do not preclude the inclusion of any particular ingredients; the monolayer-containing compositions of Okabe contain water and E. coli [water is an aqueous medium, and the inside of an E. coli cell also contains an aqueous medium] and chloroform [a non-aqueous medium], which would intrinsically require at least one interface [reads on claim 3] between a water molecule and a chloroform molecule; the plasma membrane of E. coli is a pervious membrane that separates the aqueous cytosol from the non-aqueous medium [reads on claims 6-7], and at least one molecule of RNA polymerase present in the cytosol of E. coli will contact the plasma membrane for at least some period of time; the Examiner notes that claim 8 requires no type of immobilization or length of time that said immobilization must exist; DPPC intrinsically binds selectively to mRNA but not dsDNA [as evidenced by the instant specification as filed, paragraph 0058]; regarding claim 11, the Examiner notes that the instant claims are drawn to a composition, which cannot be limited by the performance of a method step, and so prior art that reads on claim 9 will be interpreted to read on claim 11 as well).
Therefore, claims 1-3 and 6-11 are anticipated by Okabe and are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1).
Conclusion
No claims are allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Erin M. Bowers whose telephone number is (571)272-2897. The examiner can normally be reached Tuesday-Thursday, 6:30-4:00.
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, Sharmila Landau can be reached at (571)272-0614. 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.
/Erin M. Bowers/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1653 09/03/2026
Prosecution Insights