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
Response to Amendment
1. Claims 1, 14, 18, 52, 61, 65 and 67 have been amended and claim 69 added as requested in the amendment filed on July 02, 2026. Following the amendment, claims 1, 5, 11-14, 18, 19, 52, 57, 58, 61, 62 and 65-69 are pending in the instant application.
2. Claims 1, 5, 11-14, 18, 19, 52, 57, 58, 61, 62 and 65-69 are under examination in the instant office action.
3. Any objection or rejection of record, which is not expressly repeated in this action has been overcome by Applicant’s response and withdrawn.
4. New grounds of rejection necessitated by Applicant’s amendment are set forth below.
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.
5. Claims 52, 62, 67 and 68, as amended, and new claim 69 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.
6. Claim 52, as presented, makes no sense. Briefly, the claim expressly requires determination of the ratio of cholesteryl oleate to cholesteryl palmitoleate in two biological samples obtained from the subject under testing, such as the second sample obtained after obtaining the first one, and concluding that the subject has impaired cognitive function if the second ratio is lower than the ratio determined from the first sample. First, since there is no specific limitation applied to the term “after,” the claim, by broadest reasonable interpretation, allows for collection of the two immediately sequential samples. This raises the issue under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, new matter, since the specification appears to be lacking support for the invention as currently claimed. Second, this further raises the issue of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, lack of enablement, for not disclosing how to practice the invention as currently claimed. Since the claim is prone to multiple interpretation, the claim is indefinite and therefore rejected.
7. Claims 62 and 67-69 are indefinite for being dependent from indefinite claim(s).
Conclusion
8. Claims 1, 5, 11-14, 18, 19, 57, 58, 61, 65 and 66 are allowed. Claims 52, 62 and 67-69 are rejected.
9. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OLGA N CHERNYSHEV whose telephone number is (571)272-0870. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM to 5:30PM, Monday to Friday.
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, Jeffrey Stucker can be reached at (571)272-0911. 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.
/OLGA N CHERNYSHEV/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1675
July 28, 2026
Prosecution Insights