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 .
Priority
This application draws priority from a U.S. Provisional Patent Application 63/368,197, filed on 12 July 2022
Status of Claims
Claims 1-12, 16-17, 21-22, 25-26, 30-31 and 34-37 are pending.
Claims 1-12, 16-17, 21-22, 25-26, 30-31 and 34-37 are examined herein.
Information Disclosure Statement
References, such as Sato et al 2004 on page 13 and Broothaerts et al 2005 on page 14, indicated throughout the disclosure are not listed in the information disclosure statement. For example, 37 CFR § 1.98(b) requires a list of all patents, publications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office, and MPEP § 609.04(a) states, "the list may not be incorporated into the specification but must be submitted in a separate paper." Therefore, unless the references have been cited by the examiner on form PTO-892 or in the IDS filed 3/20/2026, they have not been considered.
Claim Interpretation
Claims 1-3, and 6 reciting a “GF4” protein in a chimeric protein are interpreted to be identical to “GRF4”.
Specifications
The specification discloses constructs in Table 1 that lack adequate description about their components. For example, terms “HSPt” and “ESPS” are undefined.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-3, and 6 reciting a “GF4” or “GmGF4” are objected to because it appeared “GRF4” and “GmGRF4” could be used to name the same protein.
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.
Claims 1-3, 6, 16-17, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ).
Claim 16 uses the term “regeneration capacity”, which is undefined in the disclosure and could reference multiple criteria that are indefinite. This could be interpretated as comparing regeneration frequency (number of explants with multiple buds/explant number X 100%)1 and comparing to a control. It could also be used to reference improved number of elongated shoots regenerated from single explants2. Additionally ‘regeneration capacity” could reference a reduction in time it takes to generate a plantlet when the chimeric GRF4-GIF1 protein is used3.
Claims 17 and 30 use the term “about” when referring to the fold increase in percentage of transgenic or genome edited shoots recovered from a soybean plant cell in a transformation or genome editing procedure in comparison to a control soybean plant cell lacking the chimeric polypeptide. This is not a definite term and does not clearly define the metes and bounds of the claims. Page 11 of the specification in the first paragraph teaches “the percentage of transgenic or genome edited shoots recovered from the soybean plant cell in a transformation or genome editing procedure is increased by up to 2-fold, 4-fold, 5-fold, 6-fold, 8-fold, 9-fold, 10-fold, or 12-fold in comparison to a control soybean plant cell lacking the chimeric polypeptide” but does not explicitly define an acceptable range for “about”.
Claims 1-3, and 6 reciting a “GF4” or “GmGF4” are rejected to because it appeared “GRF4” and “GmGRF4” could be used to name the same protein. Additionally “GmGF4” is used to identify SEQ ID NO:1 in Claims 1 and 2 while page 4 paragraph 19 and page 31 of the spec indicate SEQ ID NO:1 is called “GRF4” or “GmGRF4”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 1-12, 16-17 and 21, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PCT Patent Publication No. WO 2021185358 A1 and published 2021-09-234 in view of US Patent Publication No. 20220411813 A1 and US 20100199382 A1.
Claims 1-10 are drawn to a composition comprising a polynucleotide encoding a chimeric GRF4-GIF1 with a spacer peptide and operably linked terminator and promoter. It also teaches a second recombinant polynucleotide further comprising an expression cassette with a promoter, acetohydroxyacid synthase (AHAS), and terminator. The first recombinant polynucleotide can also comprise a recombinant DNA molecule or a recombinant RNA molecule. The second recombinant polynucleotide can also encode an RNA (i.e. gRNA) or protein of interest and be used for bacterially mediated transfection or transformation of a plant cell.
Publication WO 2021185358 A1 teaches protein fusions of GmGRF5, GmGRF6, and GmGRF11 to the GmGIF1 protein and their efficacy for increased transformation efficiency and regeneration of soybean in examples 6-9 (columns 20-23). The fusion protein GmGRF5-GIF1 protein was able to improve regeneration frequency (Figure 5D and 6A). In regards to instant Claim 1, constructs in figures 4-5 appear to show polynucleotides encoding the chimeric GRF-GIF1 protein operably linked to terminators “E9 term” and “Term”. Figures also appear to show separate cassettes (second recombinant polynucleotides), encoding resistance genes “Kan” and “Bar” with promoters “CaMV” and “35s Pro” and terminator “polyA signal”5. Column 12 lines 8-13 discloses a coding sequence (i.e. recombinant polynucleotide) encoding a GRF protein fused to the N-terminus of the GIF protein via a AAAA linker as was drawn to in instant claim 6. Column 11 line 61 to column 12 line 3 teaches exogenous nucleic acid sequence of interest being placed in the same expression construct with the GRF-GIF fusion protein or a different construct (i.e. second recombinant polynucleotide) while column 12 line 28 teaches exogenous nucleic acid sequences of interest can encode an herbicide resistance gene as was drawn to in instant Claims 1 and 7. Promoters and terminators for operably linked recombinant polynucleotides is taught in column 8 lines 17-26 as was drawn to in claims 1, 6, and 8-9. Claim 8 is also addressed in figures 4 and 5 where the recombinant DNA molecule and chimeric GRF-GIF1 polypeptide are operably linked with a promoter, “35S”. Regarding instant claim 7, constructs outlined in figures 4 and 5 show a Cas9 gene (recombinant DNA molecule) in the first recombinant polynucleotide with the chimeric GRF-GIF protein. Additionally, column 14 line 61 to column 15 line 17 and figures 4-5 teaches and shows second recombinant polynucleotide comprising an expression cassette for sgRNA (i.e. guide RNA i.e. polynucleotide encoding RNA of interest) operably linked to a promoter “U6-26” and “U6-26 Term” terminator, which was directed to in claim 9. Figure 5B demonstrates the soybean genomic GmFAD2 gene sequences targeted by guide RNA (a gene editing molecule of claim 9) used for plant transformation as was described in instant claim 10.
WO 2021185358 A1 does not explicitly teach a chimeric protein with a GmGRF4 polypeptide with SEQ ID NO: 1 or a GmGIF1 polypeptide with the SEQ ID NO: 2. While it does teach the use of a selection cassette (i.e. bar), it does not explicitly teach an AHAS which confers resistance to an AHAS inhibitor.
US 20220411813 A1, filed 16 June 2022, relates to compositions and methods for modifying Growth Regulating Factor (GRF) family transcription factors in soybean plants. It teaches the same sequence of GmGRF4 (SEQ ID NO: 1) recited in claims 1-2 and is below for reference. Additionally, SEQ ID NO: 80 contains the WRC (i.e. SEQ ID NO: 4) and QLQ (i.e. SEQ ID NO: 5) sequences as was recited in claim 3. These regions were highlighted in the alignment below. It also teaches the use of AHAS genes (i.e. claim 1) for herbicide resistance in paragraph 316.
RESULT 1
US-17-841-711-80
(NOTE: this sequence has 1 duplicate in the database searched.
See complete list at the end of this report)
Sequence 80, US/17841711
Publication No. US20220411813A1
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: Pairwise Plants Services, Inc.
APPLICANT: Miller, Marisa
APPLICANT: Mathew, Lolita G.
APPLICANT: Crawford, Brian C.W.
TITLE OF INVENTION: MODIFICATION OF GROWTH REGULATING FACTOR FAMILY TRANSCRIPTION
TITLE OF INVENTION: FACTORS IN SOYBEAN
FILE REFERENCE: 1499.16X
CURRENT APPLICATION NUMBER: US/17/841,711
CURRENT FILING DATE: 2022-06-16
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: US 63/211,860
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2021-06-17
NUMBER OF SEQ ID NOS: 150
SEQ ID NO 80
LENGTH: 333
TYPE: PRT
ORGANISM: Glycine max
Query Match 100.0%; Score 1783; Length 333;
Best Local Similarity 100.0%;
Matches 333; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 MNISGGGGTVMGFSSNGRSPFTVSQWQELEHQALIFKYMVAGLPVPPDLVLPIQKSFDST 60
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1 MNISGGGGTVMGFSSNGRSPFTVSQWQELEHQALIFKYMVAGLPVPPDLVLPIQKSFDST 60
Qy 61 LSHAFFHHPTLSYCSFYGKKVDPEPGRCRRTDGKKWRCSKEAYPDSKYCERHMHRGRNRS 120
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 61 LSHAFFHHPTLSYCSFYGKKVDPEPGRCRRTDGKKWRCSKEAYPDSKYCERHMHRGRNRS 120
Qy 121 RKPVESQTMTHSSSTVTSLTVTGGGDSNGTVNFQNLPTNAFGNLQGTDSGTDRTNYHLDS 180
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 121 RKPVESQTMTHSSSTVTSLTVTGGGDSNGTVNFQNLPTNAFGNLQGTDSGTDRTNYHLDS 180
Qy 181 IPYAIPSKEYRCLQGLKSEGGEHCFFSEASGSNKVLQMESQLENTWPSMSTRVASFSTSK 240
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 181 IPYAIPSKEYRCLQGLKSEGGEHCFFSEASGSNKVLQMESQLENTWPSMSTRVASFSTSK 240
Qy 241 SSTDSLLHSDYPQHSFLSGEYASGEHVKEEGQPLRPFSNEWPKSRESWSGLEDDISNQTA 300
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 241 SSTDSLLHSDYPQHSFLSGEYASGEHVKEEGQPLRPFSNEWPKSRESWSGLEDDISNQTA 300
Qy 301 FSTTQLSISIPMSSDFSATSSQSPHGENEIQFR 333
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 301 FSTTQLSISIPMSSDFSATSSQSPHGENEIQFR 333
WO 2021185358 A1 and US 20220411813 A1 do not teach a GmGIF1 polypeptide with a SEQ ID NO:2 and SNH domain of SEQ ID NO: 6 .
Applicant’s claimed amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NO:2, and drawn to in claims 1-2, has 99.6 sequence similarity to SEQ ID NO 159 in US 20100199382 A1. It also contains the SNH domain (SEQ ID NO: 6 and highlighted in the alignment below) recited in claim 4. This reference teaches the use of a GIF1 protein (also called synovial sarcoma translocation SYT1 in paragraph 16) from Glycine max and was disclosed in Table A.2. This publication teaches the overexpression of GRF and SYT (i.e. GIF) proteins for increasing various plant yield-related traits (see abstract).
RESULT 3
US-12-678-918-159
(NOTE: this sequence has 3 duplicates in the database searched.
See complete list at the end of this report)
Sequence 159, US/12678918
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: Frankard, Valerie
APPLICANT: Reuzeau, Christophe
TITLE OF INVENTION: PLANTS HAVING INCREASED YIELD-RELATED TRAITS AND A METHOD FOR
TITLE OF INVENTION: MAKING THE SAME
FILE REFERENCE: 13987-00117-US
CURRENT APPLICATION NUMBER: US/12/678,918
CURRENT FILING DATE: 2010-03-18
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: PCT/EP2008/062540
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2008-09-19
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: US 60/975882
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2007-09-28
PRIOR APPLICATION NUMBER: EP 07116988.2
PRIOR FILING DATE: 2007-09-21
NUMBER OF SEQ ID NOS: 270
SEQ ID NO 159
LENGTH: 210
TYPE: PRT
ORGANISM: Glycine max
Query Match 99.6%; Score 1076; Length 210;
Best Local Similarity 99.5%;
Matches 209; Conservative 0; Mismatches 1; Indels 0; Gaps 0;
Qy 1 MQQHLMQMQPMMAAYYPNNVTTDHIQQYLDENKSLILKIVESQNSGKLSECAENQARLQR 60
||||||||||||| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1 MQQHLMQMQPMMAGYYPNNVTTDHIQQYLDENKSLILKIVESQNSGKLSECAENQARLQR 60
Qy 61 NLMYLAAIA DSQPQPPTMSGQYPPSGMMQQGAQYMQAQQQAQQMTPQQLMAARSSLLYAQ 120
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 61 NLMYLAAIA DSQPQPPTMSGQYPPSGMMQQGAQYMQAQQQAQQMTPQQLMAARSSLLYAQ 120
Qy 121 QPYSALQQQQAMHSALGSSSGLHMLQSEGSNVNVGGGFPDFVRGGSSTGEGLHSGGRGII 180
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 121 QPYSALQQQQAMHSALGSSSGLHMLQSEGSNVNVGGGFPDFVRGGSSTGEGLHSGGRGII 180
Qy 181 GSSKQEMGGSSEGRGEGGENLYLKVADDGN 210
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 181 GSSKQEMGGSSEGRGEGGENLYLKVADDGN 210
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of WO 2021185358 A1, US 20220411813 A1, and US 20100199382 A1 to create a composition comprising a GmGRF4-GIF1 chimeric protein with a linker AAAA sequence (i.e. SEQ ID NO. 3 of Claim 5). It would also have been obvious to include a second recombinant polynucleotide encoding an AHAS resistance sequence and include an RNA or protein of interest used for plant transformation. Additionally, operable linkage to promoters and terminators is routinely used in the art (see WO 2021185358 A1 column 8 lines 18-26) meaning arrangement and number of recombinant polynucleotides claimed is a design choice as the criticality of this specific design has not been demonstrated. Additionally, methods for improving regeneration efficiency utilizing this composition has already been suggested for the use in dicot crops (i.e. soybeans). This was taught in the abstract of Debernardi, Juan M., et al. "A GRF–GIF chimeric protein improves the regeneration efficiency of transgenic plants." Nature biotechnology 38.11 (2020): 1274-1279. Debernardi et al 2020 also provides the motivation for developing this composition on page 1 paragraph 2 where they establish the need for new methods that provide efficient transformation, increased ease of use, and suitability for a broader range of recalcitrant species and genotypes. One of ordinary skill in the art would also have a reasonable expectation of success for using GRF4-GIF1 chimeric proteins as they have already been demonstrated to increase the regeneration frequence in wheat and citrus (see abstract of Debernardi et al 2020).
Claim 11 recites a bacterial Agrobacterium sp., Rhizobium sp., Sinorhizobium sp., Mesorhizobium sp., Bradyrhizobium sp., Azobacter sp., or Phyllobacterium sp. cell comprising the construct referenced in claim 1.
WO 2021185358 A1 teaches the use of Agrobacterium to transform soybean plants in column 20 line 40 and in examples 7-9. This indicates they were in possession of Agrobacteria harboring a composition comprising two operably linked recombinant polynucleotides encoding GmGRF-GmGIF1 chimeric protein and a resistance gene.
It would have been prima facie obvious to combine the teachings of WO 2021185358 A1, US 20220411813 A1, and US 20100199382 A1 to generate an Agrobacterium cell comprising the composition of claim 1. Doing so would result in a bacterium capable of transforming soybean and improve the regeneration efficiencies as described in WO 2021185358 A1 in column 20 line 40 and Table 6.
Claims 12, 16-17, and 21 are directed to a soybean plant or cell comprising the composition of claim 1 with improved regeneration capacity; further comprising about a 9-fold increase of transgenic or genome edited shoots recovered from the soybean plant cell in a transformation or genome editing procedure in comparison to a control soybean plant.
Column 20 example 6 of publication WO 2021185358 A1 teaches soybean plant tissue cells transformed (i.e. comprising) a composition containing the chimeric (GmGRF-GmGIF1) polypeptide and a resistance gene as was directed to in claims 12 and 21. Regarding claims 16, column 20 line 64 and table 6 show GRF5 and GIF1 can “significantly improve the regeneration efficiency (i.e. regeneration capacity) of soybean callus. In addition, the gene editing efficiency of the endogenous gene of the regeneration plant is detected, showing that the gene editing efficiency was also significantly improved”. Column 21 lines 40-43 teaches “On elongation medium with moderate stringency of glufosinate selection, the average number of elongated shoots (>2 cm) increased 2.8-fold with pGmGRF5-GmGIF1 ( 432.3) relative to the control (156.0)” which was directed to in claim 17. An increase in percentage of transgenic or genome edited shoots (i.e. transformation or mutation frequency), directed to in claim 17, is also seen in example 9 (see Figure 6F-6G) when pGmGRF5-GmGIF1 was used to edit recalcitrant (i.e. marginally transformable) soybean cultivars in combination with a GmFAD2-targeting CRISPR/Cas9 expression cassette. Results from example 9 also teach a ~3.4 fold increase in transformation frequency and ~6.7 fold increase in mutation frequency.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of WO 2021185358 A1, US 20220411813 A1, and US 20100199382 A1 to engineer a soybean plant comprising the composition of claim 1. The motivation for why someone would want to develop a soybean plant comprising the composition of claim 1 is stated in column 25 line 55-60 of WO 2021185358 A1, and was mentioned previously.
Claims 22, 25-26, 30-31 and 34-37, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2021185358 A1 and published 2021-09-236 in view of US 20220411813 A1, US 20100199382 A1, and Paz, Margie M., et al. "Improved cotyledonary node method using an alternative explant derived from mature seed for efficient Agrobacterium-mediated soybean transformation." Plant cell reports 25.3 (2006): 206-213.
Claims 22, 25-26, 30-31, and 34-37 are drawn to a method of producing a regenerable plant structure using the soybean plant cell of claim 12 (previously rejected) and an AHAS inhibitor so it harbors the second recombinant polynucleotide. The first recombinant polynucleotide is transiently expressed and not stably incorporated into the genome of the soybean plant cell. This method leads to an increase in the percentage of transgenic or genome edited shoots recovered from recalcitrant soybean plant lines or cell in a transformation or genome editing procedure by up to about 9-fold in comparison to a control soybean plant cell lacking the chimeric polypeptide. This method also recites a method for introducing a genome editing system into the soybean plant cell. The regenerable structure can comprise a shoot of 1 to 2, 3, or 4 centimeters in length which is transferred to rooting media and used to generate a plantlet.
Regarding Claims 22, WO 2021185358 A1 teaches a method of improving plant cell regeneration and transformation of an exogenous nucleic acid sequence of interest in a plant comprising: introduction of constructs into plants and then regenerating an intact plant from the plant cell which was explained in column 8 lines 35-67. The method for producing regenerable plant structures is also explained in figure 5C which teaches shoot (i.e. regenerable plant structure) proliferation and elongation is performed under selection. Claim 25 is addressed in column 15 in the paragraph beginning on line 59, which teaches polynucleotides encoding the GRF and GIF can improve efficiency of regeneration and transformation when transiently expressed to make a transgene-free modified plant. Additionally, example 9 (column 22 line 30) of WO 2021185358 A1 discloses a method, using a composition consisting of a chimeric GmGRF-GmGIF1 protein and soybean plant cell, already capable of improving transformation and regeneration efficiency in recalcitrant (i.e. marginally transformable) soybean cultivars (i.e. claim 26). In regards to claim 30, results from example 9 also teach a ~3.4 fold increase in transformation frequency and ~6.7 fold increase in mutation frequency for one cultivar. Using the same method in another cultivar, resulted in 2.5% transformation efficiency when the chimeric protein was used but was 0% when absent (See figure 6F-6G). Example 9 also teaches transformed plants with constructs encoding the chimeric GmGRF5-GmGIF1 protein in combination with a GmFAD2-targeting CRISPR/Cas9 expression cassette. The GmFAD2-targeting CRISPR/Cas9 expression cassette, recited in column 22 line 44, is a genome editing system drawn to in claim 31. Example 9 also teaches shoot regenerable structures that are greater than or equal to 2 cm in tables 7 and 8 which are also drawn to in claim 34.
While WO 2021185358 A1 teaches the use of resistance polynucleotides and the selection herbicide glufosinate in example 9, it does not explicitly teach the use of any AHAS inhibitor. It also does not explicitly teach the steps of transferring the shoot, with a length of 1 to 4 cm, to rooting media and obtaining a plantlet with shoots and roots.
Paragraph 325 of US 20100199382 A1 teaches a method where plant cells are transformed via Agrobacterium, then transferred to shooting and rooting media (drawn to in claim 35) to create rooted shoots (i.e. plantlet of claim 36) which could be transferred to soil.
US 20100199382 A1 does not explicitly teach the use of an AHAS inhibitor or transferring the shoot, with a length of 1 to 4 cm, to rooting media.
Paragraph 316 of US 20220411813 A1 teaches AHAS inhibitor herbicides imidazolinones and sulphonylureas which were drawn to in claims 22 and 37. US 20220411813 A1 does not explicitly teach transferring the shoot, with a length of 1 to 4 cm, to rooting media.
Paz et al 2006 teaches transferring elongated shoots (regenerable structure of claim 34) with a length of > 2.5 cm to rooting medium on page 3 paragraph 1.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of WO 2021185358 A1, US 20220411813 A1, US 20100199382 A1, and Paz et al 2006 to generate a method using the composition of claim 1 and plant cell of claim 12 to generate plantlets from regenerable structures transferred to rooting media with an AHAS inhibitor. The use of AHAS inhibitors and rooting media as well as length the shoots are transferred to rooting media are design choices already known in the art as previously discussed and demonstrates why one of ordinary skill in the art would have a high expectancy of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would also have been motivated to make these modification because of the need to identify new methods that provide efficient transformation, increased ease of use, and suitability for a broader range of recalcitrant species and genotypes7.
Even if it is determined that WO 2021185358 A1, US 20220411813 A1, US 20100199382 A1, and Paz et al 2006 do not explicitly teach each limitation in the instant claims, plant in vitro tissue culture and Agrotransformation techniques for generating transgenic plants as well as the use of operably linked polynucleotides encoding resistance genes, gene editing molecules (i.e. CRISPR or gRNA), and chimeric GRF-GIF protein fusions were known and were routinely used in the art at the time the instant application was filed. Similarly, modifications to the polynucleotide compositions, plant or bacterial compositions, desired relative amounts of genome edited shoots, or methods of practice using these compositions, would be mere design choice and routine optimizations of the methods taught by the cited references and the general state of the art, absent evidence to the contrary.
Conclusion
No claims are allowed.
Communication
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GEORGE W MEYER whose telephone number is (571)272-3733. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am- 5:00 pm.
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, Bratislav Stankovic can be reached at 571-270-0305. 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.
/GEORGE W MEYER/ Examiner, Art Unit 1662
/BRATISLAV STANKOVIC/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Units 1661 & 1662
1 US 12416013 B2 column 4 line 15
2 US 12416013 B2 column 4 line 21
3 Debernardi, Juan M., et al. "A GRF–GIF chimeric protein improves the regeneration efficiency of transgenic plants." Nature biotechnology 38.11 (2020): 1274-1279 Supplementary Figure 2
4 The instant rejection uses the corresponding U.S Patent No. 12416013 B2 as an English translation and is used for referencing column and line numbers.
Bar gene, 35S promoter, and polyadenylation for termination are discussed in applicant’s disclosure in paragraphs 43-45 of the specification.
6 The instant rejection uses the corresponding U.S Patent No. 12416013 B2 as an English translation and is used for referencing column and line numbers.
7 (see Debernardi et al 2020 page 1 paragraph 1)
Prosecution Insights