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. Status of the Claims Claims 1-19 filed 15December2023 are pending, original, and examined on the merits herein. Priority There is no priority claim of record . The effective filing date of claims 1-19 is the actual filing date of this application, that being 15December2023. Deposit For the sake of a clear record, a Deposit Rejection would have been made but-for the information provided at ¶142 on pages 18-19 of the specification. The statements there appear to be in compliance with 37 CFR §§ 1.801-1.809. Please note that the timelines for making the deposited material available are set by any patent that is granted from this application ( and not a timeline set by US Pat. No. 12329110 regarding parent variety CV944460 or by US Pat. No. 9307724 regarding CV193693). Claim Objections Claim s 8 , 11, and 12 are objected to because of the following informalities: please add a comma in the claim as follows “… carbohydrate metabolism , and modified protein metabolism” . Appropriate correction is required. Claim 1 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: for consistency across the claims set, please amend the second line of the claim as follows “… characteristics of hybrid corn variety CH010553 ….” Appropriate correction is required. Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: to be consistent with the preamble of claim 15, please amend part (c) of claim 17 as follows “… derived from [[the]] hybrid corn variety CH010553.” . Appropriate correction is required. Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: please add commas to the claims as follows “… of claim 2 , or a part thereof , and producing ….” Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 - Indefiniteness 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 appl icant regards as his invention. Claim 10 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. Based on the explicit language of the claims (see claim 1) and the specification, it is clear that a plant of hybrid corn variety CH010553 is made by crossing a plant of inbred corn variety CV944460 with a plant of inbred corn variety CV193693. However, part (b) of claim 10 suggests that a plant of hybrid corn variety CH010553 (further comprising a heritable trait) may be made by crossing a plant of variety CV944460 (further comprising a heritable trait) with a plant of variety CV944460 or by crossing a plant of variety CV193693 (further comprising a heritable trait) with a plant of variety CV193693. Therefore, part (b) appears to conflict with the information given in the claims and specification. Looking at the last two lines of part (b), Applicant may wish to consider amending part (b) to say something like “producing a plant of hybrid corn variety CH010553 further comprising said heritable trait by crossing a plant of said first inbred corn variety with a plant of said second inbred corn variety, wherein at least one of the inbred plants heritably carries said heritable trait.” Claim 17 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. At part (b), “ the progeny plant” appears to lack antecedent basis. Please amend “growing the progeny plant …” to “growing a [[the]] progeny plant ….” Part (a) of the claim introduces a seed (full name of the seed written as “a seed of a progeny plant of a subsequent generation”) and then part (b) introduces a plant grown from the seed of part (a) (“growing the progeny plant … from said seed ….”). Because the phrase “of a progeny plant of a subsequent generation” at part (a) is just part of the seed name , “a progeny plant” at part (a) does not give antecedent basis for the plant grown therefrom ( i.e., for “the progeny plant” down at part (b)). For these reasons, “ the progeny plant” at part (b) should be “ a progeny plant”. Applicant may wish to consider simplifying claim 17 to remove “subsequence generation” phrases, such as the following: The method of claim 15, further comprising the steps of: (a) crossing said progeny corn plant derived from hybrid corn variety CH010467 with itself of a second plant to produce a seed of a progeny plant of a subsequent generation ; (b) growing a [[the]] progeny plant of the subsequent generation from said seed of (a) the progeny plant of the subsequent generation ; and (c) repeating steps (a) and (b) for at least an additional 3-10 generations to produce a progeny corn plant further derived from the hybrid corn variety CH010467 . Claim 18 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. There is no well-recognized meaning of what a “commodity plant product” is, nor a limiting definition of “commodity plant product” in the specification. For at least that reason, “commodity plant product” at claim 18 is indefinite. That phrase is, however, defined as “grain, starch, seed oil, corn syrup, or protein” down at claim 19. It would be remedial to bring the limitations at claim 19 up into claim 18. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 – Written Description 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. Claim s 7-8 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. These claims are directed toward a seed of hybrid corn variety CH010553 into which a single locus conversion has been introduced. Without more information in the claims, and looking at the explicit language of claim 8, the single locus conversion may impact carbohydrate or protein metabolism, for example, which may materially change one or more of the morphological and physiological traits which define the variety CH010553 ( see Table 1 at pages 16-18 of the specification). To that end, the claimed seed may grow into a plant that is materially different than a plant of hybrid variety CH010553 and, without more information from Applicant, a skilled artisan could not reasonably expect what its characteristics would be. It follows that a skilled artisan would not reasonably believe that Applicant could reasonably expect what its characteristics would be. Like the language at claim 13, it would be remedial of this rejection to add the phrase “… wherein a plant grown from the seed comprises said single locus conversion and otherwise comprises all the morphological and physiological characteristics of hybrid corn variety CH010553 when grown under the same environmental conditions” to claim 7. Conclusion The closest prior art may be identified as BIRRU (US Pat. No. 9,700,007) regarding plants/parts of hybrid corn variety CH465736. Plants of hybrid variety CH465736 have materially similar characteristics as a plant of hybrid variety CH010553 but, based on the respective disclosures, has materially different structure/sequence structure as compared to a plant of hybrid variety CH010553. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT Rebecca STEPHENS whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-0070 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday through Friday 8:30-4:30 . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Amjad ABRAHAM can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 270-7058 . 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. /REBECCA STEPHENS/ Examiner, Art Unit 1663 /MATTHEW R KEOGH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1663