Prosecution Insights
Last updated: September 17, 2026
Application No. 18/582,848

PROTEIN-DERIVED PEPTIDE FOR IMPROVING IMMUNITY AGAINST 2019 NOVEL CORONAVIRUS (2019-nCoV) AND USE THEREOF

Non-Final OA §101§102§112
Filed
Feb 21, 2024
Priority
Feb 21, 2023 — CN 202310145383.0
Examiner
VARADARAJ, ARCHANA
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
ZHEJIANG A&F UNIVERSITY
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
10m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allowance Rate
4 granted / 5 resolved
+20.0% vs TC avg
Strong +33% interview lift
Without
With
+33.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
50 currently pending
Career history
31
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
6.3%
-33.7% vs TC avg
§103
29.0%
-11.0% vs TC avg
§102
21.3%
-18.7% vs TC avg
§112
16.4%
-23.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 5 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §102 §112
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, claim 1, in the reply filed on 07/23/2026, is acknowledged. Claim 1 is hereby examined on the merits. Claims 2-3 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Priority This application filed 02/21/2024 claims foreign priority to 202310145383.0, filed 02/21/2023. Information Disclosure Statement No IDS has been provided. Nucleotide and/or Amino Acid Sequence Disclosures Summary of Requirements for Patent Applications Filed On Or After July 1, 2022, That Have Sequence Disclosures 37 CFR 1.831(a) requires that patent applications which contain disclosures of nucleotide and/or amino acid sequences that fall within the definitions of 37 CFR 1.831(b) must contain a “Sequence Listing XML”, as a separate part of the disclosure, which presents the nucleotide and/or amino acid sequences and associated information using the symbols and format in accordance with the requirements of 37 CFR 1.831-1.835. This “Sequence Listing XML” part of the disclosure may be submitted: 1. In accordance with 37 CFR 1.831(a) using the symbols and format requirements of 37 CFR 1.832 through 1.834 via the USPTO patent electronic filing system (see Section I.1 of the Legal Framework for Patent Electronic System (https://www.uspto.gov/PatentLegalFramework), hereinafter “Legal Framework”) in XML format, together with an incorporation by reference statement of the material in the XML file in a separate paragraph of the specification (an incorporation by reference paragraph) as required by 37 CFR 1.835(a)(2) or 1.835(b)(2) identifying: a. the name of the XML file b. the date of creation; and c. the size of the XML file in bytes; or 2. In accordance with 37 CFR 1.831(a) using the symbols and format requirements of 37 CFR 1.832 through 1.834 on read-only optical disc(s) as permitted by 37 CFR 1.52(e)(1)(ii), labeled according to 37 CFR 1.52(e)(5), with an incorporation by reference statement of the material in the XML format according to 37 CFR 1.52(e)(8) and 37 CFR 1.835(a)(2) or 1.835(b)(2) in a separate paragraph of the specification identifying: a. the name of the XML file; b. the date of creation; and c. the size of the XML file in bytes. SPECIFIC DEFICIENCIES AND THE REQUIRED RESPONSE TO THIS NOTICE ARE AS FOLLOWS: Specific deficiency - This application fails to comply with the requirements of 37 CFR 1.831-1.834 because it does not contain a “Sequence Listing XML” as a separate part of the disclosure. A “Sequence Listing XML” is required because initial submission of a sequence listing XML is required in accordance with §§ 1.831 through 1.834. Required response - Applicant must provide: • A “Sequence Listing XML” part of the disclosure, as described above in item 1. or 2.; together with o A statement that indicates the basis for the amendment, with specific references to particular parts of the application as originally filed, as required by 37 CFR 1.835(a)(3); o A statement that the “Sequence Listing XML” includes no new matter as required by 37 CFR 1.835(a)(4) AND • A substitute specification in compliance with 37 CFR 1.52, 1.121(b)(3), and 1.125 inserting the required incorporation by reference paragraph as required by 37 CFR 1.835(a)(2), consisting of: o A copy of the previously-submitted specification, with deletions shown with strikethrough or brackets and insertions shown with underlining (marked-up version); o A copy of the amended specification without markings (clean version); and o A statement that the substitute specification contains no new matter. Specific deficiency - Sequences appearing in the specification are not identified by sequence identifiers (i.e., “SEQ ID NO:X” or the like) in accordance with 37 CFR 1.831(c). The specification filed on 02/21/2024 does not recite appropriate sequence identifiers in the form of SEQ ID numbers in approximately 83 locations. The sequences recited in the specification must include SEQ ID numbers to properly identify the sequences. Appropriate correction is required. Specific deficiency - The claims filed on 07/23/2026 do not recite appropriate sequence identifiers in the form of SEQ ID numbers. The sequences recited in the claims must include SEQ ID numbers to properly identify the sequences. For example, an appropriate form of the sequence “Trp-Trp-Asn-Leu-Asn” of claim 1 is (SEQ ID NO: 1).” Appropriate correction is required. Required response – Applicant must provide: A substitute specification in compliance with 37 CFR 1.52, 1.121(b)(3), and 1.125 inserting the required sequence identifiers, consisting of: • A copy of the previously-submitted specification, with deletions shown with strikethrough or brackets and insertions shown with underlining (marked-up version); • A copy of the amended specification without markings (clean version); and • A statement that the substitute specification contains no new matter. Claim Objections Claim 1 objected to because of the following informalities: sequences recited in the claim must include SEQ ID numbers to properly identify the sequences. Appropriate correction is required. 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 applicant regards as his invention. Claim 1 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. Regarding claim 1, in the way the claim is drafted, it is unclear whether the amino acid sequence is directed to a hazelnut-derived peptide or to the sequence of the main protease. Appropriate correction is required to address the ambiguity. For prior art purpose, Examiner interprets the claim to be directed to a hazelnut-derived peptide. 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. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a natural phenomenon (natural product) without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) the judicial exception of ‘comprising an amino acid sequence of ‘Trp-Trp-Asn-Leu-Asn’. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claims are drafted such that there is no difference in substance from the sequence claim, to that of a naturally occurring SdrD B-like domain containing protein in Verrucomicrobiaceae bacterium (see below). The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. PNG media_image1.png 202 620 media_image1.png Greyscale See the following analysis. Step 1: Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? Yes, the claim is directed to a composition of matter. Step 2A: Is the claim directed to a law of nature, a natural phenomenon (product of nature) or abstract idea? Prong One: Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature or natural phenomenon? Yes, the claim recites an amino acid sequence. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the claimed sequence comprising ‘Trp-Trp-Asn-Leu-Asn’, is the sequence of SdrD B-like domain containing protein that is naturally occurring in Verrucomicrobiaceae bacterium. Prong Two: Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? No, the additional elements in the claim do not integrate the judicial exceptions into a practical application. The claim is directed only to the amino acid sequence and to the function incorporated by the sequence. 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(2) as being anticipated by Nancy Craig et al., hereinafter Craig (US20150284768A1, Date Nov 24, 2014). Regarding claim 1, Examiner interprets ‘comprising’ as open-ended and inclusive of any N/C terminal additions. Accordingly, Craig teaches a sequence comprising ‘Trp-Trp-Asn-Leu-Asn’ in SEQ ID NO: 1, (see residues 543-547). Regarding the limitation ‘with an inhibitory…(2019-nCoV M-pro)’, is interpreted by the Examiner as unappreciated property. Applicant is reminded that “[T]he discovery of a previously unappreciated property of a prior art composition, or of a scientific explanation for the prior art' s functioning, does not render the old composition patentably new to the discoverer.” Atlas Powder Co. v. Ireco Inc., 190 F.3d 1342, 1347, 51 USPQ2d 1943, 1947 (Fed. Cir. 1999). Thus, the claiming of a new use, new function or unknown property which is inherently present in the prior art does not necessarily make the claim patentable. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1254, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). It is noted that In re Best (195 USPQ 430) and In re Fitzgerald (205 USPQ 594) discuss the support of rejections wherein the prior art discloses subject matter which there is reason to believe inherently includes functions that are newly cited or is identical to a product instantly claimed. In such a situation the burden is shifted to the applicants to "prove that subject matter shown to be in the prior art does not possess characteristic relied on" (205 USPQ 594, second column, first full paragraph). Conclusion No claim is allowed. Correspondence Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARCHANA VARADARAJ whose telephone number is (571)272-2366. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10:00am-5:00pm. 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, Melissa Fisher can be reached at 5712707430. 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. /ARCHANA VARADARAJ/ Examiner, Art Unit 1658 /Melissa L Fisher/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1658
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 21, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 25, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §101, §102, §112 (current)

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
80%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+33.3%)
3y 5m (~10m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 5 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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