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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 submitted on 7/28/2026 are pending.
Claims 1-20 are for examination.
Applicants’ argument submitted on 7/28/2026 is considered. Rejections and/or objections not reiterated from previous office actions are hereby withdrawn.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 6/24/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the examiner has considered the IDS statements.
Claim Rejection
Claim Rejections: 35 USC § 112(b)
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 13, 17 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 13 is indefinite in reciting “further comprising substitutions in the positions 36, 60, 64, 73” because of following reason:
Claim 13 depends on claim 12 and claim 12 already teach substitution on position 73. Therefore claim 13 can’t be substituted twice. Correction is required.
Claim 17 is indefinite in reciting “amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NO: 2 except insofar as it comprises alterations and substitutions” because of following reason: Seq ID NO:2 is unsubstituted parent phytase and said SEQ id NO: 2 cannot have substituted positions selected the group as disclosed in the claim. Make No sense.
. Correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-14, 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Skov et al. (Skov (US 9,611,469, issued from 14/627584 – common assignee).
Skov discloses a phytase (SEQ ID NO:2) having 100% sequence identity to the phytase of SEQ ID NO:2 of the instant application and having established disulfide bridges having various combinations including five combinations are selected from the following position pairs: A+B+C+D+E,
Skov discloses introducing disulfide bridges at A: 52/99, B: 52/99, and C: 141/199 into the phytase of SEQ ID NO:2.
Skov discloses a phytase variant having A/B/D and having one or more amino acid substitutions, such as N203L (see Columns 3-4).
Therefore Skov discloses
teaches N31C/G52C/A99C/K141C/T177C/V199C/N203L
PNG
media_image1.png
52
286
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Skov discloses a phytase variant having A/B and C N203L/P207G (Column 6).
Skov also teaches E having position 176 substituted.
Therefore a substitution in one or more positions selected from the following: 155, 161, 162, 168, 176 also taught by Skov et al.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made based on Skov et al to have phytase variant of phytase of SEQ ID NO:2 having A+B+C+D+E bridge having a variant having alterations N31C/G52C/A99C/K141C/T177C/V199C/N203L and further having a substitution at position 176.
Claims 15, 16 and 17 is not included in the 103 rejection because though Skov et al. (Skov (US 9,611,469) teach P207 of SEQ ID NO: 2 is substituted with G ( teach P207G) but not substituted with T or does not teach P207T.
Conclusion
Claims 1-14 and 18-20 are rejected, claims 15-16 are objected for depending on rejected claims; and no claim is allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
examiner should be directed to Mohammad Meah whose telephone number is 571-272-
1261. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30-5PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s
supervisor, Robert Mondesi can be reached on 4089187584. The fax phone number
for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the
Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for
published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR.
Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only.
For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should
you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system.
/MOHAMMAD Y MEAH/Examiner, Art Unit 1652
