Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/459,107

ARTERIOSCLEROSIS AND CANCER DETECTION METHOD USING DEOXYHYPUSINE SYNTHASE GENE AS INDICATOR

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Aug 31, 2023
Examiner
VOLKOV, ALEXANDER ALEXANDROVIC
Art Unit
1677
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
National University Corporation Chiba University
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
28%
Grant Probability
At Risk
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
47%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 28% of cases
28%
Career Allow Rate
22 granted / 79 resolved
-32.2% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+19.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
116
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
7.6%
-32.4% vs TC avg
§103
37.6%
-2.4% vs TC avg
§102
11.8%
-28.2% vs TC avg
§112
31.3%
-8.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 79 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
CTNF 18/459,107 CTNF 97184 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 the Claims Claims 1-6 are examined herein. Claim Objections Claims 1-2 are objected to because: Claim 1 recites detecting autoantibody in a subject … in a sample from a test subject. The terminology should be consistent: a subject or a test subject. Claim 2 recites antibody while referring to the anti-deoxyhypusine synthase autoantibody. The terminology should be consistent. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-01 AIA 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. 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. 07-31-01 Claims 1-6 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. This is a written description rejection. Claim 1 is directed to a method for detecting anti-deoxyhypusine synthase autoantibody in a subject with a digestive system cancer. Claim 6 recites esophageal cancer or colorectal cancer. Prior art is silent on method for detecting anti-deoxyhypusine synthase autoantibody in a subject with a digestive system cancer. The level of predictability in the art of cancer detection is low. Level of one of ordinary skill is high with an ordinary practitioner possessing a PhD and related post-doctoral research experience. Amount of direction and examples provided by the inventor – the specification discloses data only for two cancers: esophageal and colorectal. Other cancers listed in [0038] are not supported by data. The data related to esophageal and colorectal cancers are presented in Fig. 9-10. All other figures in the specification are related to arteriosclerosis not claimed in instant invention. The data presented in Fig. 9-10 have a serious problem because samples for the cancer patient group were pooled, assayed, and plotted together “serum specimens of esophageal cancer patients (61 cases) and colorectal cancer patients (19 cases)” ([0135]). The specification fails to provide results for esophageal cancer separately from the results for colorectal cancer, and separate results cannot be extracted from this one experiment. The pooled samples make it impossible to make a conclusion that both esophageal cancer samples and colorectal cancer samples indeed performed in this assay as expected. The ROC curve of Fig. 10 is not very close to the theoretical curve of an ideal assay, and the specification fails to provide any data that the autoantibody assay method was validated for both esophageal cancer and colorectal cancer samples. Therefore, there is a possibility that one of the groups of the cancer samples (esophageal or colorectal) may have failed to perform in this assay. As such, the combined data provided in the specification fail to separate contributions of the esophageal cancer samples from contributions of the colorectal cancer samples to the assay of Fig. 9 and the ROC curve of Fig. 10. Based on the above findings, one of ordinary skill in the art would conclude that Applicant did not have possession of the claimed invention for both the broad category of digestive system cancers in claim 1 and for individual esophageal and colorectal cancers. 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claim 2 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 2 recites said test sample. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, because claim 1 does not recite any test sample. Subject Matter Free of the Prior Art Claims 1-6 are free of the prior art. Please, see 112(a) rejection above for details. The prior art does not teach a method for detecting anti-deoxyhypusine synthase autoantibody in human subjects with or without any cancer condition. The closest prior art: Brissette et al . (PGPub 20040014064) teach a method for identifying a candidate therapeutic for an erythropoietic disorder, said method comprising: contacting a compound with a panel comprising SEQ ID NO:1 listed in a table in Fig. 3, but fail to teach detection of anti-deoxyhypusine synthase autoantibody using the SEQ ID NO:1. Wu et al . (PGPub 20070224201) teach an isolated antibody that binds to a polypeptide having the amino acid sequence shown in any one of FIGS. 1-6355 - SEQ ID NO:1 is listed in the specification, but fail to teach detection of anti-deoxyhypusine synthase autoantibody using the SEQ ID NO:1. McClelland et al . (PGPub 20110236903) teach autoantibodies specific to prostate cancer ([0382]), but fail to teach detection of anti-deoxyhypusine synthase autoantibody using the SEQ ID NO:1. Chan et al . (PGPub 20130084582) teach detecting induced autoantibody of PLSCR1, STOML2 or SEC61 protein to diagnose colorectal cancer (Abstract), but fail to teach detection of anti-deoxyhypusine synthase autoantibody. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alexander Volkov whose telephone number is (571) 272-1899. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM-5:00PM (EST). If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Bao-Thuy Nguyen can be reached on (571) 272-0824. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). 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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form. /ALEXANDER ALEXANDROVIC VOLKOV/Examiner, Art Unit 1677 /REBECCA M GIERE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1677 Application/Control Number: 18/459,107 Page 2 Art Unit: 1677 Application/Control Number: 18/459,107 Page 3 Art Unit: 1677 Application/Control Number: 18/459,107 Page 4 Art Unit: 1677 Application/Control Number: 18/459,107 Page 5 Art Unit: 1677
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 31, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12590957
METHODS FOR MEASURING AN AMOUNT OF AN ANALYTE IN A COMPLEX SAMPLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12546766
METHOD FOR ANALYZING BIO-SUBSTANCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12529700
METHODS FOR IDENTIFYING CANCER
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12480940
METHODS FOR ISOLATING SURFACE MARKER DISPLAYING AGENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 25, 2025
Patent 12474351
Mass Spectrometry Calibrator
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 18, 2025
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
28%
Grant Probability
47%
With Interview (+19.6%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 79 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