DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. 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 for the cited rejections 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.
3. Response to Election/Restriction filed on 3/13/2026 is acknowledged.
4. Claim filed on 9/26/2024 is acknowledged.
5. Claims 1-19 have been cancelled.
6. New claims 20-34 have been added.
7. Claims 20-34 are pending in this application.
8. Claims 32 and 33 are withdrawn from consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to non-elected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Claims 23, 24 and 27 are withdrawn from consideration as being drawn to non-elected species.
9. Claims 20-22, 25, 26, 28-31 and 34 are under examination.
Elections/Restrictions
10. Applicant’s election of Group 1 (claims 20-31 and 34) and election of peptide of SEQ ID NO: 222 as species of peptide; peptide of SEQ ID NO: 222 conjugated to polyethylene glycol (PEG) polymer as species of conjugate; a composition comprising peptide of SEQ ID NO: 222 in the form of cream as species of composition; and a bandage comprising the peptide of SEQ ID NO: 222 as species of wound dressing in the reply filed on 3/13/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). The requirement is made FINAL in this office action.
Group 1 is drawn to a peptide comprising SEQ ID NO: 222, or a substantially similar growth promoting sequence having 1 to 3 amino acid alterations compared SEQ ID NO: 222, in which the or each amino acid alteration is independently selected from insertion, addition, deletion and substitution of an amino acid, wherein the peptide is up to 50 amino acids in length; a conjugate comprising such peptide, conjugated, linked or fused to a binding partner, in which the binding partner is optionally selected from a polyethylene glycol (PEG) polymer, a molecular weight increasing compound, a lipophilic group, or an antibody molecule; a composition comprising such peptide; and a wound dressing comprising such peptide, wherein the dressing is optionally selected from the group consisting of a bandage or a plaster. A search was conducted on the elected species; and these appear to be free of prior art. A search was extended to the genus in claims 20, 25, 26 and 34; and the genus in claim 34 appears to be free of prior art. However, prior art was found for the genus in claims 20, 25 and 26. Claims 23, 24 and 27 are withdrawn from consideration as being drawn to non-elected species. Claims 20-22, 25, 26, 28-31 and 34 are examined on the merits in this office action.
Specification
11. Please note: The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible error. Applicant's cooperation is required in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification (see MPEP § 608.01).
Objections
12. Claim 20 is objected to for the following minor informality: Applicant is suggested to amend claim 26 as "A growth promoting peptide comprising the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NO: 222, or the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NO: 222 having 1 to 3 amino acid alteration, wherein the amino acid alteration is independently selected from insertion, addition, deletion or substitution of an amino acid, and wherein the peptide is up to 50 amino acids in length”.
13. Claim 22 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
14. Claim 25 is objected to for the following minor informality: Applicant is suggested to amend claim 25 as “A conjugate comprising the peptide of claim 20 conjugated to polyethylene glycol (PEG), polyoxyethylene glycerol (POG), poly-lysine, poly-glutamic acid, poly-aspartic acid, a lipophilic moiety comprising a hydrocarbon chain of 4 to 30 carbon atoms, albumin, gelatin, fatty acid, polysaccharide, dextran, cell penetrating peptide, or antibody molecule”.
15. Claim 29 is objected to for the following minor informality: Applicant is suggested to amend claim 29 as “The composition of claim 26, wherein the composition is in the form of serum, gel…”.
Furthermore, claim 29 recites the term “cream” twice. Applicant is required to correct this error.
16. Claim 30 is objected to for the following minor informality: Applicant is suggested to amend claim 30 as “The composition of claim 26, wherein the composition further comprises a cosmetically or pharmaceutically acceptable excipient selected from the group consisting of emollient, diluent, carrier, binder, lubricant, suspending agent, coating agent, preservative, stabilizer, dye, vehicle, solubilizing agent, base, emulsifying agent, fragrance, humectant, and surfactant”.
17. Claim 34 is objected to for the following minor informality: Applicant is suggested to amend claim 34 as “A wound dressing comprising the peptide of claim 20, wherein the wound dressing is a bandage or a plaster”.
Rejections
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 101
18. 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.
19. Claim 25 is 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, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. Claim 25 is directed to a conjugate comprising the peptide of claim 20, conjugated, linked or fused to a binding partner, in which the binding partner is optionally selected from a polyethylene glycol (PEG) polymer, a molecular weight increasing compound, a lipophilic group, or an antibody molecule.
As evidenced by instant specification, peptide of instant SEQ ID NO: 222 is a fragment of naturally occurring protein Q0DEV5 from rice (see for example, page 6, lines 27-31). The naturally occurring protein Q0DEV5 from rice is a conjugate recited in instant claim 25, in that it comprises the peptide of instant SEQ ID NO: 222 fused to a molecular weight increasing compound.
The claim 25 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the claimed conjugate in instant claim 25 does not recite features or steps demonstrating a marked difference from what exists in nature; and the claimed conjugate in claim 25 does not recite meaningful limitations that add something of significance to the judicial exception. Therefore, the claimed conjugate in instant claim 25 is not significantly different than a judicial exception (natural product).
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 112 paragraph (b)
20. 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.
21. Claims 25, 30 and 34 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.
22. Claim 25 recites “A conjugate comprising the peptide of claim 20, conjugated, linked or fused to a binding partner, in which the binding partner is optionally selected from a polyethylene glycol (PEG) polymer, a molecular weight increasing compound, a lipophilic group, or an antibody molecule”. First, with regards the term “binding partner”, the instant specification fails to define it. The instant specification provides some examples of binding partner on page 41, line 24 to page 42, line 20 of instant specification. However, it remains unclear what is encompassed within the recited “binding partner”. Second, claim 25 recites the limitation “in which the binding partner is optionally selected from a polyethylene glycol (PEG) polymer, a molecular weight increasing compound, a lipophilic group, or an antibody molecule”. It is unclear whether such recitation further limits the binding partner or not. In the instant case, it appears such recitation is a preferred embodiment.
Taken all these together, the metes and bounds of instant claim 25 is vague and indefinite.
23. Claim 30 recites the limitation “optionally selected from the group consisting of an emollient, diluent, carrier, binder, lubricant, suspending agent, coating agent, preservative, stabiliser, dye, vehicle, solubilising agent, base, emulsifying agent, fragrance, humectant, and surfactant”. It is unclear whether such recitation further limits the cosmetically or pharmaceutically acceptable excipient or not. In the instant case, it appears such recitation is a preferred embodiment. Therefore, the metes and bounds of instant claim 30 is vague and indefinite.
24. Claim 34 recites the limitation “wherein the dressing is optionally selected from the group consisting of a bandage or a plaster”. It is unclear whether such recitation further limits the wound dressing or not. In the instant case, it appears such recitation is a preferred embodiment. Therefore, the metes and bounds of instant claim 34 is vague and indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 112 paragraph (d)
25. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), fourth paragraph:
Subject to the [fifth paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA )], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
26. Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
27. Claim 21 depends on claim 20, and claim 21 recites “The peptide of claim 20, wherein the peptide is growth promoting”. In the instant case, the peptide recited in instant claim 20 is a growth promoting peptide. Therefore, the scope of the peptide recited in instant claim 21 is identical to the scope of the peptide recited in claim 20. Claim 21 does not further limit the peptide recited in claim 20, therefore, claim 21 is improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of claim 20.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 112 paragraph (a)
Written Description
28. 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.
29. Claims 20, 21, 25, 26, 28-31 and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The MPEP lists factors that can be used to determine if sufficient evidence of possession has been furnished in the disclosure of the application. These include “level of skill and knowledge in the art, partial structure, physical and/or chemical properties, functional characteristics alone or coupled with a known or disclosed correlation between structure and function, and the method of making the claimed invention. Disclosure of any combination of such identifying characteristics that distinguish the claimed invention from other materials and would lead one of skill in the art to the conclusion that the applicant was in possession of the claimed species is sufficient” (MPEP § 2163).
A claimed genus may be satisfied through sufficient description of a representative number of species or disclosure of relevant, identifying characteristics such as functional characteristics coupled with a known or disclosed correlation between function and structure (MPEP § 2163(3)a(II)). The number of species that describe the genus must be adequate to describe the entire genus; if there is substantial variability, a large number of species must be described.
The analysis for adequate written description considers (a) actual reduction to practice, (b) disclosure of drawings or structural chemical formulas, (c) sufficient relevant identifying characteristics in the way of complete/partial structure or physical and/or chemical properties or functional characteristics when coupled with known or disclosed correlation with structure, and (d) representative number of samples.
In the instant case, claims 20, 21, 25, 26, 28-31 and 34 are drawn to a peptide comprising SEQ ID NO: 222, or a substantially similar growth promoting sequence having 1 to 3 amino acid alterations compared SEQ ID NO: 222, in which the or each amino acid alteration is independently selected from insertion, addition, deletion and substitution of an amino acid, wherein the peptide is up to 50 amino acids in length; a conjugate comprising such peptide, conjugated, linked or fused to a binding partner, in which the binding partner is optionally selected from a polyethylene glycol (PEG) polymer, a molecular weight increasing compound, a lipophilic group, or an antibody molecule; a composition comprising such peptide; and a wound dressing comprising such peptide, wherein the dressing is optionally selected from the group consisting of a bandage or a plaster.
The genus of instant claimed peptide is very broad, including any peptide comprising the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NO: 222, or the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NO: 222 having 1 to 3 amino acid alteration, wherein the amino acid alteration is independently selected from insertion, addition, deletion or substitution of an amino acid, and wherein the peptide is up to 50 amino acids in length.
The instant specification discloses the peptide of instant SEQ ID NO: 222 as a growth promoting peptide via cell proliferation assay using human dermal fibroblast cells.
The issue at question is whether a person of ordinary skilled in the art would be able to determine what structural feature/amino acid sequence is required for the instant claimed peptide to have the functional characteristics of being a growth promoting peptide.
(a) actual reduction to practice and (b) disclosure of drawings or structural chemical formulas:
In the instant case, the instant specification discloses the peptide of instant SEQ ID NO: 222 as a growth promoting peptide via cell proliferation assay using human dermal fibroblast cells. However, the instant specification fails to disclose any example of a variant of instant SEQ ID NO: 222 having 1 to 3 amino acid alteration, wherein the amino acid alteration is independently selected from insertion, addition, deletion or substitution of an amino acid as a growth promoting peptide.
Taken all these together, other than the limited example, the instant specification fails to disclose the effect of altering the amino acid sequence of instant SEQ ID NO: 222 on the functional characteristics of being a growth promoting peptide. The instant specification does not describe a general correlation between structure and function for the claimed genus of peptide.
(c) sufficient relevant identifying characteristics in the way of complete/partial structure or physical and/or chemical properties or functional characteristics when coupled with known or disclosed correlation with structure:
As discussed above, in the instant case, based on the disclosure of instant specification, other than the limited example, a person of ordinary skilled in the art would not be able to determine the effect of altering the amino acid sequence of the peptide of instant SEQ ID NO: 222 on the functional characteristics of being a growth promoting peptide.
With regards to the instant claimed peptide being a growth promoting peptide, it is unknown in the art.
However, it is well known in the peptide/protein art that even single amino acid changes or differences in the amino acid sequence of a protein can have dramatic effects on the protein’s function. As an example of the unpredictable effects of mutations on protein function, Drumm et al (Annu. Rev. Pathol. Mech. Dis., 2012, 7, pages 267-282, filed with IDS) teach cystic fibrosis is an autosomal recessive disorder caused by mutations in the CFTR (cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator) gene, for example, page 268, Section “CYSTIC FIBROSIS”. Drumm et al further teach several mutations can cause cystic fibrosis, including two mutations G551D and G551S; and clinical consequences are quite different for these two changes, as the G551D variant has virtually no detectable activity, and consequently a classic, severe phenotype is associated; G551S, however, has reduced but clearly detectable function and is associated with a much milder presentation of CF, for example page 269, left column, the last paragraph. Drumm et al also teach that in the most common cystic fibrosis mutation ΔF508 (the absence of amino acid 508 of the normally 1,480-amino acid protein) gives rise to the cystic fibrosis phenotype, for example, page 268, right column, the 2nd paragraph. Thus, even the substitution or deletion of a single amino acid can have dramatic and unpredictable effects on the function of the protein. The unpredictability of the effect of amino acid substitution on the function and/or property of peptide/protein is further confirmed and discussed in Yampolsky et al (Genetics, 2005, 170, pages 1459-1472, filed with IDS). Yampolsky et al teach even conservative substitution can significantly affect the function of the protein/peptide, for example, page 1465, Table 3. Although the disclosures of Drumm et al and Yampolsky et al are directed to proteins/peptides other than a growth promoting peptide, they illustrate the inherent unpredictability with respect to the biological activity of a given protein/peptide after even minor changes to the primary amino acid sequence.
Therefore, based on the state of art, a person of ordinary skilled in the art would not be able to determine the effect of altering the amino acid sequence of the peptide of instant SEQ ID NO: 222 on the functional characteristics of being a growth promoting peptide. The instant specification does not describe a general correlation between structure and function for the claimed genus of peptide.
(d) representative number of samples:
In the instant case, the genus of instant claimed peptide is very broad, including any peptide comprising the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NO: 222, or the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NO: 109 having 1 to 3 amino acid alteration, wherein the amino acid alteration is independently selected from insertion, addition, deletion or substitution of an amino acid, and wherein the peptide is up to 50 amino acids in length.
And, as discussed in (a) and (b) above, the instant specification discloses the peptide of instant SEQ ID NO: 222 as a growth promoting peptide via cell proliferation assay using human dermal fibroblast cells. However, the instant specification fails to disclose any example of a variant of instant SEQ ID NO: 222 having 1 to 3 amino acid alteration, wherein the amino acid alteration is independently selected from insertion, addition, deletion or substitution of an amino acid as a growth promoting peptide.
Considering the broadness of the genus of instant claimed peptide, the instant specification fails to provide sufficient examples to describe the entire genus of peptide comprising the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NO: 222, or the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NO: 109 having 1 to 3 amino acid alteration, wherein the amino acid alteration is independently selected from insertion, addition, deletion or substitution of an amino acid, and wherein the peptide is up to 50 amino acids in length being a growth promoting peptide claimed.
Taken all these together, considering the state of the art and the disclosure in instant specification, it is deemed that the instant specification fails to provide adequate written description for the claimed genus of peptide comprising the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NO: 222, or the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NO: 222 having 1 to 3 amino acid alteration, wherein the amino acid alteration is independently selected from insertion, addition, deletion or substitution of an amino acid, and wherein the peptide is up to 50 amino acids in length being a growth promoting peptide; and does not reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the entire scope of the claimed invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1)
30. 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.
31. Claims 20, 21, 25, 26, 29 and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Commuri et al (US 2004/0107461 A1).
The instant claims 20, 21, 25, 26, 29 and 31 are drawn to a peptide comprising SEQ ID NO: 222, or a substantially similar growth promoting sequence having 1 to 3 amino acid alterations compared SEQ ID NO: 222, in which the or each amino acid alteration is independently selected from insertion, addition, deletion and substitution of an amino acid, wherein the peptide is up to 50 amino acids in length; a conjugate comprising such peptide, conjugated, linked or fused to a binding partner, in which the binding partner is optionally selected from a polyethylene glycol (PEG) polymer, a molecular weight increasing compound, a lipophilic group, or an antibody molecule; and a composition comprising such peptide.
Commuri et al teach peptide of SEQ ID NO: 383, 384 or 386 consisting of the amino acid sequence SFDFIDGYDTPVEGRKINWMKAGILEADRVLTVSPYYAEE, which is 40 amino acids in length and comprises the amino acid sequence of instant SEQ ID NO: 222 (underlined), for example, page 66, Table XV. It meets the limitations of the peptide recited in instant claim 20.
With regards to the limitation recited in instant claim 21, since the peptide of SEQ ID NO: 383, 384 or 386 in Commuri et al meets all the structural limitations of the peptide recited in instant claim 20 and comprises the amino acid sequence of instant SEQ ID NO: 222, the peptide of SEQ ID NO: 383, 384 or 386 in Commuri et al would necessarily have the same properties and functionality of the peptide recited in instant claim 20. Therefore, the peptide of SEQ ID NO: 383, 384 or 386 in Commuri et al is growth promoting. Furthermore, the MPEP states “Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). "When the PTO shows a sound basis for believing that the products of the applicant and the prior art are the same, the applicant has the burden of showing that they are not." In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990). Therefore, the prima facie case can be rebutted by evidence showing that the prior art products do not necessarily possess the characteristics of the claimed product. In re Best, 562 F.2d at 1255, 195 USPQ at 433. See also Titanium Metals Corp. v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (Claims were directed to a titanium alloy containing 0.2-0.4% Mo and 0.6-0.9% Ni having corrosion resistance. A Russian article disclosed a titanium alloy containing 0.25% Mo and 0.75% Ni but was silent as to corrosion resistance. The Federal Circuit held that the claim was anticipated because the percentages of Mo and Ni were squarely within the claimed ranges. The court went on to say that it was immaterial what properties the alloys had or who discovered the properties because the composition is the same and thus must necessarily exhibit the properties.).” (see MPEP § 2112.01 I). In addition, since the USPTO lacks the experimental facilities to make a further determination, the burden is on the Applicant to prove the otherwise.
With regards to the conjugate recited in instant claim 25, the peptide of SEQ ID NO: 383, 384 or 386 in Commuri et al comprises the amino acid sequence of instant SEQ ID NO: 222 fused to a molecular weight increasing compound.
With regards to the composition recited in instant claims 26, 29 and 31, in the instant case, the only active ingredient in the composition recited in instant claim 26 is the peptide of instant claim 20. Therefore, the peptide of SEQ ID NO: 383, 384 or 386 in Commuri et al meets the limitation of instant claim 26. Furthermore, one of ordinary skilled in the art would understand and reasonably expect the peptide of SEQ ID NO: 383, 384 or 386 in Commuri et al is a rinse off formulation and a nutritional supplement for supplying certain amino acids. Therefore, the peptide of SEQ ID NO: 383, 384 or 386 in Commuri et al meets the limitations of instant claims 29 and 31. Furthermore, since the USPTO lacks the experimental facilities to make a further determination, the burden is on the Applicant to prove the otherwise.
Since the reference teaches all the limitations of instant claims 20, 21, 25, 26, 29 and 31; the reference anticipates instant claims 20, 21, 25, 26, 29 and 31.
Examiner’s Notes
32. The peptide, the composition and the wound dressing recited in instant claims 22, 28, 30 and 34 are free of prior art. The closest prior art is Commuri et al (US 2004/0107461 A1). Commuri et al teach peptide of SEQ ID NO: 383, 384 or 386 consisting of the amino acid sequence SFDFIDGYDTPVEGRKINWMKAGILEADRVLT VSPYYAEE, which is 40 amino acids in length and comprises the amino acid sequence of instant SEQ ID NO: 222 (underlined), for example, page 66, Table XV. However, there is no teaching, motivation, or other type of suggestion to modify the peptide of SEQ ID NO: 383, 384 or 386 in Commuri et al and arrive at the peptide, the composition and the wound dressing recited in instant claims 22, 28, 30 and 34. Therefore, the peptide, the composition and the wound dressing recited in instant claims 22, 28, 30 and 34 are both novel and unobvious over the prior arts of record. And the claimed peptide, the composition and the wound dressing are markedly different from what exist in nature.
Conclusion
No claim is allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LI N KOMATSU whose telephone number is (571)270-3534. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8am-4pm EST.
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 on 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.
/LI N KOMATSU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1658
Prosecution Insights