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 without traverse of Group I, claims 1-9, 12 and 15-21 in the reply filed on 4/28/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 22-28, 31, 32, 36 and 38 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 4/28/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 1-9, 12 and 15-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Onishi et al. (US 2020/0231932 A1, published 7/23/2020).
Regarding claim 1, Onishi et al. teach a method for obtaining a population of oligodendrocyte progenitor cells (OPCs) from undifferentiated pluripotent stem cells, the method comprising:
a) obtaining a culture of undifferentiated pluripotent stem cells;
b) culturing the undifferentiated pluripotent stem cells for a first time period under culture conditions sufficient to induce differentiation of the undifferentiated pluripotent stem cells to neuroectoderm cells and to neural progenitor cells; and
c) culturing the neuroectoderm cells and neural progenitor cells from step b) for a second
time period under culture conditions sufficient to differentiate the neural progenitor
cells to OPCs,
further comprising the step of:
i) cryopreserving the neuroectoderm cells and neural progenitor cells from step b) at or about
the completion of the first time period, and thawing the cryopreserved cells, wherein
the subsequently thawed cells are cultured in any remaining steps of the method (parags. 2, 7, 10-13 and 15-17).
Regarding claim 2, Onishi teaches culturing on laminin (parags. 17 and 18).
Regarding claims 3 and 4, Onishi teaches that the cells are hESCs or hiPSCs (parag. 63).
Regarding claim 5, Onishi teaches that the cells are cultured in Dorsomorphin, PD0325901 and RA (parag. 0079).
Regarding claim 6, Onishi teaches culturing in the presence of AA and RA (parag. 141).
Regarding claim 7, Onishi teaches culturing the neuroectoderm and neuroprogenitor cells in the presence of EGF and hsbFGF (parags. 15, 92 and 145).
Regarding claim 8, Onishi teaches culturing in the presence of EGF and PDGF-AA (parag. 98)
Regarding claim 9, Onishi teaches that the first period of time is from about 3 days to about 60 days (parag.79, Figs. 1 and 2A).
Regarding claim 12, Onishi teaches that the second period of time is from about 10 days to about 60 days (parag.98, Figs. 1 and 2A).
Regarding claim 15, Onishi teaches that the neuroectoderm and neuroprogenitor cells are cryopreserved at about day 14 (parag. 13).
Regarding clam 19, Onishi teaches that the OPCs are cryopreserved (parag. 112).
Regarding clam 20, Onishi teaches that the cryopreserved OPCs are thawed (parags. 30 and112).
Regarding claim 21, Onishi teaches OPCs express NG2 and PDGFRa (parag. 12).
Thus the teachings of Onishi clearly anticipate the invention of claims 1-9, 12 and 15-21.
Conclusion
No claims are allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID A MONTANARI whose telephone number is (571)272-3108. The examiner can normally be reached M-Tr 8-6.
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, Peter Paras can be reached at 571-272-4517. 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 A MONTANARI/Examiner, Art Unit 1632
Prosecution Insights