Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 25, 2026
Application No. 18/368,931

METHODS, SYSTEMS, AND ARRAYS FOR BIOMOLECULAR ANALYSIS

Final Rejection §DP
Filed
Sep 15, 2023
Priority
Sep 28, 2012 — provisional 61/707,758 +11 more
Examiner
BROWN, MINDY G
Art Unit
1634
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Vibrant Holdings LLC
OA Round
2 (Final)
58%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 58% of resolved cases
58%
Career Allowance Rate
89 granted / 154 resolved
-2.2% vs TC avg
Strong +40% interview lift
Without
With
+40.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
180
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
13.1%
-26.9% vs TC avg
§103
29.3%
-10.7% vs TC avg
§102
10.7%
-29.3% vs TC avg
§112
35.8%
-4.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 154 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. Status Any objection or rejection not restated below is withdrawn. Claim 2 is cancelled. Claims 1 and 3-19 are under examination. 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 and 3-19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-5 of U.S. Patent No. 10,006,909. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant claims are broader in scope that the claims in the 909 patent and encompass the allowed subject matter. Response to Arguments Applicant did not address this rejection in the response dated 2 September 2026. It is maintained. Conclusion No claim is allowed. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MINDY G BROWN whose telephone number is (571)270-5605. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Friday, 9:00 am - 5:00 pm 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, Anne Gussow can be reached at (571) 272-6047. 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. /MINDY G BROWN/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1683 /ANNE M. GUSSOW/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1683
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 15, 2023
Application Filed
Jun 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DP
Sep 02, 2026
Response Filed
Sep 30, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 10934327
CAPSID-MODIFIED, RAAV3 VECTOR COMPOSITIONS AND USES IN GENE THERAPY OF HUMAN LIVER CANCER
3y 3m to grant Granted Mar 02, 2021
Patent 10787654
Methods and Compositions for Sequences Guiding Cas9 Targeting
4y 2m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2020
Patent 10774313
TWO PLASMID MAMMALIAN EXPRESSION SYSTEM
4y 1m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2020
Patent 10761090
SANDWICH ASSAYS IN DROPLETS
3y 7m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2020
Patent 10759830
BACTERIAL COLICIN-IMMUNITY PROTEIN PROTEIN PURIFICATION SYSTEM
2y 2m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2020
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
58%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+40.5%)
2y 8m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 154 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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