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
Claims 14-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected method, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 4/13/2026.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 8 are objected to because of the following informalities: please italicize all species names. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1-14 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, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The claims provide fop a composition consisting of a consortium of bacterial strains, including Bacillus megaterium, B. thuringiensis, B. pumilus, B. subtilis, B. amyloliquefaciens; Pseudomonas putida, a nitrogen-rich fertilizer, a phosphate-rich fertilizer, a surfactant, and an inoculant comprising Lactobacillus casei and a member of the Actinomycetes class. Every ingredient, with the exception of Actinomycetes, provides for reasonable written description under 35 USC 112(a).
Actinomycetes is a class of bacterium, wherein based upon the NCBI Taxonomy browser, there are dozens of classified and unclassified, orders, with many families within the orders, with many genera per family, with dozens more species within each genus, wherein there are likely dozens of strains within many of the species. See Schoch, et al (NCBI Taxonomy: a comprehensive update on curation, resources and tools. Database (Oxford), 2020 [www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Taxonomy/Browser/wwwtax.cgi?command=show&mode=tree&id=1760&lvl=3]). Based upon the claim language, the Applicant is claiming every single classified and unclassified species present on that listing, and those not present on the listing, which includes members of the Bifidobacteria and Candida genera, both of which are ubiquitous and have dozens of species and strains; additionally, the Applicant is claiming any member of the Actinomycetes class that have yet to be characterized or reclassified into this particular class. Based upon the fact that there is not a single example of a member from the Actinomycetes class found in the specification, it is unclear what specific member could be used to demonstrate possession of any species found in this family. This is further highlighted by the fact that Actinomycetes is a class, wherein the class includes many orders, wherein the orders include many families, wherein families include many genera, wherein genera include many species, wherein species include many strains. Furthermore, although the Actinomycetes class includes species with broadly overlapping characteristics, all of the orders, families, genera, and species are explicitly divided because they are disparate enough to not be considered the same or obvious variants.
Based upon the shear number of possible members found in the Actinomycetes class, and the lack of a teaching of any members of the Actinomycetes class, the Applicant has not provided reasonable written description in the instant specification to suggest that they were in possession of the entirety of the claim embodiments, and a reasonable number of members of the Actinomycetes class to show possession across the whole class. Furthermore, there is nothing in the instant specification or prior art to suggest that these members can be substituted as obvious variants of each other, as there is nothing to suggest a clear overlap in an important physiological functionality; this would suggest that some members of the Actinomycetes could provide for compositions that were never envisioned by the Applicant, and thusly, the Applicant should not be entitled to embodiments that they never envisioned, nor should they be entitled to obvious variants of embodiments that they never envisioned.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID W BERKE-SCHLESSEL whose telephone number is (571)270-3643. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8AM-5:30PM.
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, Melenie Gordon can be reached at 571-272-8037. 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 W BERKE-SCHLESSEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1651
Prosecution Insights