Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/604,772

BIFIDOBACTERIUM ANIMALIS SUBSP. LACTIS ATM-209 INHIBITING HELICOBACTER PYLORI AND APPLICATION THEREOF

Non-Final OA §101§112
Filed
Mar 14, 2024
Examiner
GANGLE, BRIAN J
Art Unit
1645
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Shenzhen Porshealth Bioengineering Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
718 granted / 940 resolved
+16.4% vs TC avg
Strong +15% interview lift
Without
With
+15.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
28 currently pending
Career history
968
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.5%
-35.5% vs TC avg
§103
15.0%
-25.0% vs TC avg
§102
23.0%
-17.0% vs TC avg
§112
36.6%
-3.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 940 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §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 . Claims 1-10 are pending and are currently under examination. Specification The use of the trademark TWEEN has been noted in this application on page 3. It should be capitalized wherever it appears and be accompanied by the generic terminology. Although the use of trademarks is permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as trademarks. It is noted that the cited occurrence of improper use is only exemplary and applicant should review the specification to correct any other use of trademarks. 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. Claims 1-2 and 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a product of nature without significantly more. The claims recite a Bifidobacterium strain and formulations comprising said strain. Despite being drawn to a composition of matter, the claim is directed a judicial exception because it encompasses a naturally occurring organism lacking markedly different characteristics from its natural counterpart. The claim recites a formulation comprising Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis ATM-209, which, according to the instant specification, is a naturally occurring bacterium. The claim does not recite any structural, functional, or genetic modification to the bacterium that would render it “markedly different” from naturally occurring Bifidobacterium lactis. The claim does not impose meaningful limitations on the natural bacterium or integrate the exception into a practical application that is different than the functional characteristics of the natural bacterium. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation 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 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph: 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. Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as containing subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. It is apparent that the bacterial strain with the designation CGMCC No. 25896 or ATM-209 is required to practice the claimed invention. As such it must be readily available or obtainable by a repeatable method set forth in the specification, or otherwise readily available to the public. If it is not so obtainable or available, the requirements of 35 USC 112, first paragraph, may be satisfied by a deposit of the strain. It is not apparent if the bacterial strain is readily available to the public. It is noted that Applicants have referred to a deposit of the strain, but there is no indication in the specification as to public availability. The mere reference to a deposit or the biological material itself in any document or publication does not necessarily mean that the deposited biological material is readily available. Even a deposit made under the Budapest Treaty and referenced in a United States or foreign patent document would not necessarily meet the test for known and readily available unless the deposit was made under conditions that are consistent with those specified in these rules, including the provision that requires, with one possible exception ( 37 CFR 1.808(b)), that all restrictions on the accessibility be irrevocably removed by the applicant upon the granting of the patent. Ex parte Hildebrand, 15 USPQ2d 1662 (Bd. Pat. App. & Int. 1990). If a deposit is made under the terms of the Budapest Treaty, then an affidavit or declaration by Applicants, or a statement by an attorney of record over his or her signature and registration number, stating that the instant invention will be irrevocably and without restriction released to the public upon the issuance of a patent, would satisfy the deposit requirement made herein. If a deposit has not been made under the Budapest Treaty, then in order to certify that the deposit meets the criteria set forth in 37 CFR 1.801-1.809 and MPEP 2402-2411.05, Applicant may provide assurance of compliance by affidavit or declaration, or by a statement by an attorney of record over his or her signature and registration number showing that: (a) during the pendency of the application, access to the invention will be afforded to the Commissioner upon request; (b) all restrictions upon availability to the public will be irrevocably removed upon granting of the patent; (c) the deposit will be maintained in a public depository for a period of 30 years, or 5 years after the last request or for the enforceable life of the patent, whichever is longer; (d) a test of the viability of the biological material at the time of deposit (see 37 CFR 1.807); and (e) the deposit will be replaced if it should ever become inviable. 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. Claims 5-6 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Claims 5 and 6 are rendered indefinite by the phrase “a product for inhibiting Helicobacter Pylori prepared by the microbial preparation…”. There is no preparation method in the parent claim and the phrase “prepared by the preparation of” does not make sense. Conclusion No claim is allowed. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Jungersen et al (Microorganisms 2014, 2, 92-110; doi:10.3390/microorganisms2020092) disclose a strain of Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. Lactis BB-12. This strain is related, but is not the same strain as is instantly claimed. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Brian J Gangle whose telephone number is (571)272-1181. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9-6:30. 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, Vanessa Ford can be reached at 571-272-0857. 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. /BRIAN GANGLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1645
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 14, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12596121
COMPANION DIAGNOSTIC METHOD FOR USE IN THE TREATMENT OF IRRITABLE BOWEL SYNDROME WITH DIETARY INTERVENTIONS OR FAECAL MICROBIOTA TRANSPLANT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595311
CHIMERIC ANTIGEN RECEPTORS AND RELATED METHODS AND COMPOSITIONS FOR THE TREATMENT OF CANCER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589163
SHEDDING BLOCKING AGENTS WITH INCREASED STABILITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589123
COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS COMPRISING CLOSTRIDIUM BUTYRICUM FOR THE TREATMENT OF CANCER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584084
USE OF BY-PRODUCTS FROM THE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
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
76%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+15.4%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 940 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