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. 1. Claims 21-40 are pending and being examined. Specification 2. The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. Examiner suggests a title relevant to the specific antibody claimed, for example, “ IL13Rα2 ANTIBODY AND USE THEREOF FOR THE TREATMENT OF CANCER ”. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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. 3 . Claims 21-40 are 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 21 recites the limitation "capable of inhibiting the IL-13/IL13Rα2-mediated signaling ". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Dependent claims are rejected for encompassing the rejected limitation of claim 21. Examiner Suggestion: Amend claim 21 to recite “capable of inhibiting a IL-13/IL13Rα2-mediated signaling ”. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. 4 . Claims 39 and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature/ a natural phenomenon) without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) detecting the expression of IL13Rα2 in a cancer cell isolated from a biological sample of a subject. Thus , the claims are directed to the judicial exception of naturally occurring IL13Rα2 expression in patient cancer cells . This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claims recite only the detection or observation of a naturally occurring phenomenon/law of nature, which is data gathering to observe the naturally occurring phenomenon/law of nature without applying the data to a practical application. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the claims recite use of routine laboratory procedures to detect and observe naturally occurring levels of IL13Rα2 , are considered known, routine steps and are typically taken by those in the field to perform testing of a sample and are not elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception (see MPEP 2106.05(d)) . For example, Zeng et al (Am. J. Transl. Res. 2020, 12:4702-4714); Kawakami et al (Clinical Cancer Research, 2003, 9:6381-6388); Kioi et al (Cancer, 2006, 107:1407-1418); Bartolome et al ( Oncoscience , 2015, 12:787-788) ; and WO 2021207770 , Balyasnikova , claiming priority to April 2020, all teach and demonstrate routine methods for detecting IL13Rα2 expression in patient cancer cells. Routine data gathering in order to observe a natural phenomenon/ natural principle do es not add a meaningful limitation to the method as it would be routinely used by those of ordinary skill in the art in order to observe the natural phenomenon/ natural principle, and it fail s to narrow the scope of the claims such that others are not foreclosed from using the law of nature/natural phenomenon. Methods of detecting natural phenomenon preempt all practical uses of it as others must use/detect the natural phenomenon to apply it to any other correlations, diagnosis, prognosis, therapeutic response, monitoring, etc. The “wherein” clause of claim 39 recites “wherein if the expression of IL13Rα2 is detected then the therapy to be administered to the subject is the monoclonal antibody according to claim 21.” This step does not require administration of the antibody of claim 21, and is considered an abstract idea of identifying a therapy to be administered in the future when expression of IL13Rα2 is detected. The wherein clause/abstract idea does not provide a practical application of the judicial exception and does not add an element that is significantly more than the judicial exception. To obviate the rejection, there must be at least one additional element or physical step that applies, relies on, or uses the natural principle so that the claim amounts to significantly more than the judicial exception itself. The claimed method currently fails to provide a practical application of the judicial exception and fails to add any elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. 5 . Claim(s) 39 and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Kioi et al (Cancer, 2006, 107:1407-1418) . Kioi teaches an in vitro method for detecting the expression of IL13Rα2 in a cancer cell isolated from a biological sample of a subject, including metastatic cancer (Materials and Methods on p. 1408-1409; Figure 1; Tables 1 and 2). The “ wherein ” clause of claim 39 states the intended result of the step of determining if the expression of IL13Rα2 is detected . The wherein clause does not require steps to be performed and does not limit the claim to a particular structure, therefore does not distinguish the claimed method from that taught by the prior art. See MPEP 2111.04. 6 . Conclusion: No claim is allowed. Prior art made of record but not relied upon is WO 2014/152361, Debinski et al. Debinski teaches administering anti- IL13Rα2 antibodies to treat patients having cancer and to inhibit metastasis (p. 4, 6-9). Debinski does not teach or suggest the anti- IL13Rα2 antibodies comprise the instantly claimed CDR SEQ ID NOs. 7 . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT LAURA B GODDARD whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-8788 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Mon-Fri, 7am-3:30pm . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Samira Jean-Louis can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-270-3503 . 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. /Laura B Goddard/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1642