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
Election/Restriction
1. Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 30-42) and SEQ ID NO: 3 (RBOHP) in the reply filed on July 31, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 30-46 are pending. Claims 1-29 are cancelled. Claims 43-46 and SEQ ID NO: 4 are directed to non-elected subject matter are excluded from the present examination. Accordingly, claims 43-46 and SEQ ID NO: 4 are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected inventions.
Thus, claims 30-42 in conjunction with elected SEQ ID NO: 3 are examined on merits in the instant Office action. This restriction is made FINAL.
Applicant are reminded that upon the cancellation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be amended in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(b) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. Any amendment of inventorship must be accompanied by a request under 37 CFR 1.48(b) and by the fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
Information Disclosure Statement
2. Initialed and dated copies of Applicant’s IDS form 1449 filed in the papers of December 09, 2024 are attached to the instant Office action. The submissions are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
The listing of references in the specification (pages 36-40) is not a proper information disclosure statement. 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, they have not been considered.
Claim Objections
3. Claims 30, 33, 34, 35 and 38 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 30, 33, 34, 35 and 38 are objected for having non-elected SEQ ID NO: 4.
Appropriate correction is required.
Specification
4. The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In Table 1 at page 21: Elected GmRBOHP gene refers to GenBank NCBI accession number XP_003554649 which encodes protein of 887 amino acid long. However, it is noted elected SEQ ID NO: 3 (GmRBOHP) is 876 amino acid long and is 97.2% identical to the one present in GenBank NCBI accession number as shown below:
XP_003554649: DB; QY: SEQ ID NO: 3
Query Match 97.2%; Score 4471.5; Length 887;
Best Local Similarity 98.5%;
Matches 874; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 13; Gaps 12;
Qy 1 MEIQLEQQQESWSETSSTGSRSTRVGFSGPMSGPLVTPNNKKSSKKSTRFKDQEEEDFVE 60
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1 MEIQLEQQQESWSETSSTGSRSTRVGFSGPMSGPLVTPNNKKSSKKSTRFKDQEEEDFVE 60
Qy 61 ITLDVRDDTVSVQNIRGGDPETALLASRLEKRPSSLSVRLRQVSQELKRMTSSKKFDRV- 119
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 61 ITLDVRDDTVSVQNIRGGDPETALLASRLEKRPSSLSVRLRQVSQELKRMTSSKKFDRVD 120
Qy 120 RTKSGAARALKGLKFMTKNVGTEGWSQVEKRFHELAVEGKLPKTRFSQCIGMNESKEF-G 178
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| |
Db 121 RTKSGAARALKGLKFMTKNVGTEGWSQVEKRFHELAVEGKLPKTRFSQCIGMNESKEFAG 180
Qy 179 ELFDALSRRRGITSASITKDQLREFWEQITDQSFDSRLQTFFDMVDKDADGRITQEEVQE 238
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 181 ELFDALSRRRGITSASITKDQLREFWEQITDQSFDSRLQTFFDMVDKDADGRITQEEVQE 240
Qy 239 -IALSASANKLSKIQDRAEEYAALIIEELDPDNLGYIEIYNLEMLLLQAPAQSTNITTDS 297
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 241 IIALSASANKLSKIQDRAEEYAALIIEELDPDNLGYIEIYNLEMLLLQAPAQSTNITTDS 300
Qy 298 RIM-QMLSQKLVPTKDYNPIKRGFRSLAYFVEDNWKRIWVILLWLSICAALFTWKFIQYK 356
||| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 301 RIMSQMLSQKLVPTKDYNPIKRGFRSLAYFVEDNWKRIWVILLWLSICAALFTWKFIQYK 360
Qy 357 HR-VFDVMGYCVTSAKGAAETLKFNMALILLPVCRNTITWLRSKTKLGMAVPFDDNINFH 415
|| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 361 HRAVFDVMGYCVTSAKGAAETLKFNMALILLPVCRNTITWLRSKTKLGMAVPFDDNINFH 420
Qy 416 KV-AFGIAIGVGIHAIA HLTCDFPRLLHATDEEYEPMKPFFGEDRPNNYWWFVKGTEGWT 474
|| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 421 KVIAFGIAIGVGIHAIA HLTCDFPRLLHATDEEYEPMKPFFGEDRPNNYWWFVKGTEGWT 480
Qy 475 G-AIVVLMAIA YTLAQPWFRRNRLNLPKPLKRLTGFNAFWYSHHLFVIVYGLFIVHGYYL 533
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 481 GIAIVVLMAIA YTLAQPWFRRNRLNLPKPLKRLTGFNAFWYSHHLFVIVYGLFIVHGYYL 540
Qy 534 Y-SKEWYKKTTWMYLAIPMILYACERLLRAFRSGYKSVKILKVAVYPGNVLALHMSKPQG 592
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 541 YLSKEWYKKTTWMYLAIPMILYACERLLRAFRSGYKSVKILKVAVYPGNVLALHMSKPQG 600
Qy 593 -KYSSGQYIFVNCPDVSPFQWHPFSITSAPGDDYVSVHIRTLGDWTSQLKAVFAKACQP- 650
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 601 FKYSSGQYIFVNCPDVSPFQWHPFSITSAPGDDYVSVHIRTLGDWTSQLKAVFAKACQPA 660
Qy 651 SSDQSGLLRADMLQGNNIPRMPKLVIDGPYGAPAQDYKNYEVILLVGLGIGATPLISILK 710
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 661 SSDQSGLLRADMLQGNNIPRMPKLVIDGPYGAPAQDYKNYEVILLVGLGIGATPLISILK 720
Qy 711 DVLNNMKQQKDIEEAMVESGVKNNKRKPFATNRAYFYWVTREQGSFEWFKGVMDDVA-YD 769
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| ||
Db 721 DVLNNMKQQKDIEEAMVESGVKNNKRKPFATNRAYFYWVTREQGSFEWFKGVMDDVAEYD 780
Qy 770 KDGIIELHNYCTSVYEEGDARSALITMLQSLHHAKSGVDIVSGTRVKTHFARPNWRS--K 827
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| |
Db 781 KDGIIELHNYCTSVYEEGDARSALITMLQSLHHAKSGVDIVSGTRVKTHFARPNWRSVFK 840
Qy 828 HTALKHPGKRVGVFYCGAHTLVGELKRLSLDFSRKTNTKFDFHKENF 874
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 841 HTALKHPGKRVGVFYCGAHTLVGELKRLSLDFSRKTNTKFDFHKENF 887
Appropriate correction/clarification is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
5. Claims 30 and 38 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 9 and 10 of U.S. Patent No. 12,163,143 (‘143 thereafter). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because instant claims are encompassed by the claims 9 and 10 (dependent from claim 1) of US Patent’143. The claims 9 and 10 of US Patent ‘143 is directed to eliminating or reducing expression of instant SEQ ID NO: 3 in a transgenic plant cell (soybean, common bean or leguminous) which also directed to reducing expression of SEQ ID NO: 1. It would be obvious for an ordinary skill in the art to transform instant plant cell (soybean, common bean or leguminous) with an another suppression construct for reducing expression of additional RBOH proteins, including GmRBOHA protein as set forth in SEQ ID NO: 1. Obviously, one of skill in the art would have been motivated to down-regulate expression of multiple RBOH gene(s) in a plant to achieve desired improvement of trait (disease resistance/drought resistance) and thus avoiding gene redundancy effect of multiple members of RBOH gene family. Additionally, the specification of instant application and issued patent ‘143 provides sufficient guidance in this regard. See for example, pages 24-35 (instant specification) and columns 12-32 of US Patent ’143.
6. Claims 30 and 38 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 11 of U.S. Patent No. 11,136.591 (‘591 thereafter). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because instant claims are encompassed by the claim 11 (dependent from claim 1) of US Patent ’591. The claim 11 of US Patent ‘591 is directed to eliminating or reducing expression of instant SEQ ID NO: 3 in a transgenic plant cell (soybean, common bean or leguminous) which also directed to reducing expression of SEQ ID NO: 2. It would be obvious for an ordinary skill in the art to transform instant plant cell (soybean, common bean or leguminous) with an another suppression construct for reducing expression of additional RBOH proteins, including GmRBOHB protein as set forth in SEQ ID NO: 2. Obviously, one of skill in the art would have been motivated to down-regulate expression of multiple RBOH gene(s) in a plant to achieve desired improvement of trait (disease resistance/drought resistance) and thus avoiding gene redundancy effect of multiple members of RBOH gene family. Additionally, the specification of instant application and issued patent ‘591 provides sufficient guidance in this regard. See for example, pages 24-35 (instant specification) and columns 12-32 of US Patent ’591.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
6. Claims 30-42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kogel et al. (US Patent Publication NO. 20080047033; Published February 21, 2008) in view of Ranjan et al. (APS.CPS Joint meeting , August 9-13, Minneapolis, Minnesota, Volume 104 (supplement 3), No. 11, 2014, pages S.31-S.138; Published 2014) and further in view of NCBI (GenBank Sequence Accession NO. XP_003554649, Published November 25, 2015).
Kogel et al. teach reducing expression of genes encoding proteins having NADPH oxidase activity in plant cells and plants obtained thereof. The reference teaches using double-stranded RNA (double-stranded RNA interference; dsRNAi, same as siRNA), and/or antisense constructs targeted to endogenous plants NADPH oxidase coding sequences (also called respiratory burst oxidase proteins) are used to create transgenic plant cells and transgenic plants and seeds obtained thereof exhibiting reduced or complete elimination or suppression of endogenous plant NADPH oxidase activity, and wherein said transgenic plants are soybean, beans, alfalfa, barley etc. The reference further teach that transgenic plant cells or transgenic plants exhibit improved resistance to a Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (a nectrotroph). See in particular, abstract; Figure 1; paragraphs [0005] –[0334]; examples 1-5; Tables 1-6; claims 1-23.
Ranjan et al. teach as follows: “Sclerotinia sclerotiorum is a necrotrophic fungal pathogen with a broad host range. On soybean it causes Sclerotinia stem rot (SSR), which can be a substantial yield limiting disease. Recent studies have indicated that S. sclerotiorum can induce apoptotic-like programmed cell death (PCD) in its host plant. Induction of PCD and disease is reliant on the generation of reactive oxygen species (ROS) in the host. Major sources of ROS in plants under pathogen attack include plasma membrane bound NADPH oxidases. They catalyze conversion of oxygen to superoxide anion (O2–), a reactive free radical. NADPH oxidases, also known as respiratory burst oxidase homologs (RBOHs), have been identified in various plant species including tomato, tobacco, Arabidopsis and maize but their role in disease response in soybean is currently unknown. Arabidopsis NADPH oxidases, AtRbohD and AtRbohF have been implicated in plant defense response to biotic and abiotic stress. To characterize the role of soybean NADPH oxidases involved in S. sclerotiorum infection, 19 putative Rboh genes were identified from soybean databases that are homologous to Arabidopsis AtRbohD and AtRbohF. This study has shown that virus induced gene silencing (VIGS) of one homolog of NADPH oxidases,GmRbohF, leads to enhanced resistance to S. sclerotiorum. Further characterization of these genes may provide a better understanding of their role in resistance, cell death and ROS production during S. sclerotiorum infection.” See 3rd paragraph of left column at page S3.95.
Neither Kogel et al. nor Ranjan et al. teach a protein sequence from soybean having at least 97% identity to instant SEQ ID NO: 3.
NCBI specifically teach a soybean protein of GenBank Sequence Accession NO. XP_003554649 having 97.2% amino acid sequence identity to instant SEQ ID NO: 3, and as shown below.
LOCUS XP_003554649 887 aa linear PLN 25-NOV-2015
DEFINITION PREDICTED: respiratory burst oxidase homolog protein B-like
[Glycine max].
ACCESSION XP_003554649
VERSION XP_003554649.1
DBLINK BioProject: PRJNA48389
DBSOURCE REFSEQ: accession XM_003554601.3
KEYWORDS RefSeq.
SOURCE Glycine max (soybean)
ORGANISM Glycine max
Eukaryota; Viridiplantae; Streptophyta; Embryophyta; Tracheophyta;
Spermatophyta; Magnoliophyta; eudicotyledons; Gunneridae;
Pentapetalae; rosids; fabids; Fabales; Fabaceae; Papilionoideae;
Phaseoleae; Glycine; Soja.
COMMENT MODEL REFSEQ: This record is predicted by automated computational
analysis. This record is derived from a genomic sequence
(NW_014573401.1) annotated using gene prediction method: Gnomon,
supported by EST evidence.
Also see:
Documentation of NCBI's Annotation Process
##Genome-Annotation-Data-START##
Annotation Provider :: NCBI
Annotation Status :: Full annotation
Annotation Version :: Glycine max Annotation Release 102
Annotation Pipeline :: NCBI eukaryotic genome annotation
pipeline
Annotation Software Version :: 6.4
Annotation Method :: Best-placed RefSeq; Gnomon
Features Annotated :: Gene; mRNA; CDS; ncRNA
##Genome-Annotation-Data-END##
COMPLETENESS: full length.
FEATURES Location/Qualifiers
source 1..887
/organism="Glycine max"
/cultivar="Williams 82"
/db_xref="taxon:3847"
/chromosome="19"
/tissue_type="callus"
Protein 1..887
/product="respiratory burst oxidase homolog protein
B-like"
/calculated_mol_wt=101120
Region 119..216
/region_name="NADPH_Ox"
/note="Respiratory burst NADPH oxidase; pfam08414"
/db_xref="CDD:462469"
Region <196..243
/region_name="EFh"
/note="EF-hand, calcium binding motif; A diverse
superfamily of calcium sensors and calcium signal
modulators; most examples in this alignment model have 2
active canonical EF hands. Ca2+ binding induces a
conformational change in the EF-hand motif, leading to...;
cd00051"
/db_xref="CDD:238008"
Region 215..278
/region_name="EF-hand_7"
/note="EF-hand domain pair; pfam13499"
/db_xref="CDD:463900"
Region 385..534
/region_name="Ferric_reduct"
/note="Ferric reductase like transmembrane component;
pfam01794"
/db_xref="CDD:426438"
Region 575..694
/region_name="FAD_binding_8"
/note="FAD-binding domain; pfam08022"
/db_xref="CDD:285293"
Site order(608,622..625,638..640,643..646,710)
/site_type="other"
/note="FAD binding pocket [chemical binding]"
/db_xref="CDD:99778"
Site order(622,624..625)
/site_type="other"
/note="conserved FAD binding motif [chemical binding]"
/db_xref="CDD:99778"
Site order(643,646,649,681)
/site_type="other"
/note="phosphate binding motif [ion binding]"
/db_xref="CDD:99778"
Region 700..869
/region_name="NAD_binding_6"
/note="Ferric reductase NAD binding domain; pfam08030"
/db_xref="CDD:429792"
Site order(705,709..712,714)
/site_type="other"
/note="beta-alpha-beta structure motif"
/db_xref="CDD:99778"
CDS 1..887
/gene="LOC100820185"
/coded_by="XM_003554601.3:131..2794"
/db_xref="GeneID:100820185"
ORIGIN
1 meiqleqqqe swsetsstgs rstrvgfsgp msgplvtpnn kksskkstrf kdqeeedfve
61 itldvrddtv svqnirggdp etallasrle krpsslsvrl rqvsqelkrm tsskkfdrvd
121 rtksgaaral kglkfmtknv gtegwsqvek rfhelavegk lpktrfsqci gmneskefag
181 elfdalsrrr gitsasitkd qlrefweqit dqsfdsrlqt ffdmvdkdad gritqeevqe
241 iialsasank lskiqdraee yaaliieeld pdnlgyieiy nlemlllqap aqstnittds
301 rimsqmlsqk lvptkdynpi krgfrslayf vednwkriwv illwlsicaa lftwkfiqyk
361 hravfdvmgy cvtsakgaae tlkfnmalil lpvcrntitw lrsktklgma vpfddninfh
421 kviafgiaig vgihaiahlt cdfprllhat deeyepmkpf fgedrpnnyw wfvkgtegwt
481 giaivvlmai aytlaqpwfr rnrlnlpkpl krltgfnafw yshhlfvivy glfivhgyyl
541 ylskewykkt twmylaipmi lyacerllra frsgyksvki lkvavypgnv lalhmskpqg
601 fkyssgqyif vncpdvspfq whpfsitsap gddyvsvhir tlgdwtsqlk avfakacqpa
661 ssdqsgllra dmlqgnnipr mpklvidgpy gapaqdykny evillvglgi gatplisilk
721 dvlnnmkqqk dieeamvesg vknnkrkpfa tnrayfywvt reqgsfewfk gvmddvaeyd
781 kdgiielhny ctsvyeegda rsalitmlqs lhhaksgvdi vsgtrvkthf arpnwrsvfk
841 htalkhpgkr vgvfycgaht lvgelkrlsl dfsrktntkf dfhkenf
Query Match 97.2%; Score 4471.5; DB 1; Length 887;
Best Local Similarity 98.5%;
Matches 874; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 13; Gaps 12;
Qy 1 MEIQLEQQQESWSETSSTGSRSTRVGFSGPMSGPLVTPNNKKSSKKSTRFKDQEEEDFVE 60
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 1 MEIQLEQQQESWSETSSTGSRSTRVGFSGPMSGPLVTPNNKKSSKKSTRFKDQEEEDFVE 60
Qy 61 ITLDVRDDTVSVQNIRGGDPETALLASRLEKRPSSLSVRLRQVSQELKRMTSSKKFDRV- 119
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 61 ITLDVRDDTVSVQNIRGGDPETALLASRLEKRPSSLSVRLRQVSQELKRMTSSKKFDRVD 120
Qy 120 RTKSGAARALKGLKFMTKNVGTEGWSQVEKRFHELAVEGKLPKTRFSQCIGMNESKEF-G 178
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| |
Db 121 RTKSGAARALKGLKFMTKNVGTEGWSQVEKRFHELAVEGKLPKTRFSQCIGMNESKEFAG 180
Qy 179 ELFDALSRRRGITSASITKDQLREFWEQITDQSFDSRLQTFFDMVDKDADGRITQEEVQE 238
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 181 ELFDALSRRRGITSASITKDQLREFWEQITDQSFDSRLQTFFDMVDKDADGRITQEEVQE 240
Qy 239 -IALSASANKLSKIQDRAEEYAALIIEELDPDNLGYIEIYNLEMLLLQAPAQSTNITTDS 297
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 241 IIALSASANKLSKIQDRAEEYAALIIEELDPDNLGYIEIYNLEMLLLQAPAQSTNITTDS 300
Qy 298 RIM-QMLSQKLVPTKDYNPIKRGFRSLAYFVEDNWKRIWVILLWLSICAALFTWKFIQYK 356
||| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 301 RIMSQMLSQKLVPTKDYNPIKRGFRSLAYFVEDNWKRIWVILLWLSICAALFTWKFIQYK 360
Qy 357 HR-VFDVMGYCVTSAKGAAETLKFNMALILLPVCRNTITWLRSKTKLGMAVPFDDNINFH 415
|| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 361 HRAVFDVMGYCVTSAKGAAETLKFNMALILLPVCRNTITWLRSKTKLGMAVPFDDNINFH 420
Qy 416 KV-AFGIAIGVGIHAIA HLTCDFPRLLHATDEEYEPMKPFFGEDRPNNYWWFVKGTEGWT 474
|| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 421 KVIAFGIAIGVGIHAIA HLTCDFPRLLHATDEEYEPMKPFFGEDRPNNYWWFVKGTEGWT 480
Qy 475 G-AIVVLMAIA YTLAQPWFRRNRLNLPKPLKRLTGFNAFWYSHHLFVIVYGLFIVHGYYL 533
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 481 GIAIVVLMAIA YTLAQPWFRRNRLNLPKPLKRLTGFNAFWYSHHLFVIVYGLFIVHGYYL 540
Qy 534 Y-SKEWYKKTTWMYLAIPMILYACERLLRAFRSGYKSVKILKVAVYPGNVLALHMSKPQG 592
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 541 YLSKEWYKKTTWMYLAIPMILYACERLLRAFRSGYKSVKILKVAVYPGNVLALHMSKPQG 600
Qy 593 -KYSSGQYIFVNCPDVSPFQWHPFSITSAPGDDYVSVHIRTLGDWTSQLKAVFAKACQP- 650
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 601 FKYSSGQYIFVNCPDVSPFQWHPFSITSAPGDDYVSVHIRTLGDWTSQLKAVFAKACQPA 660
Qy 651 SSDQSGLLRADMLQGNNIPRMPKLVIDGPYGAPAQDYKNYEVILLVGLGIGATPLISILK 710
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 661 SSDQSGLLRADMLQGNNIPRMPKLVIDGPYGAPAQDYKNYEVILLVGLGIGATPLISILK 720
Qy 711 DVLNNMKQQKDIEEAMVESGVKNNKRKPFATNRAYFYWVTREQGSFEWFKGVMDDVA-YD 769
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| ||
Db 721 DVLNNMKQQKDIEEAMVESGVKNNKRKPFATNRAYFYWVTREQGSFEWFKGVMDDVAEYD 780
Qy 770 KDGIIELHNYCTSVYEEGDARSALITMLQSLHHAKSGVDIVSGTRVKTHFARPNWRS--K 827
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| |
Db 781 KDGIIELHNYCTSVYEEGDARSALITMLQSLHHAKSGVDIVSGTRVKTHFARPNWRSVFK 840
Qy 828 HTALKHPGKRVGVFYCGAHTLVGELKRLSLDFSRKTNTKFDFHKENF 874
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Db 841 HTALKHPGKRVGVFYCGAHTLVGELKRLSLDFSRKTNTKFDFHKENF 887
Given (i) Kogel et al. teach that reducing or eliminating expression of gene(s) encoding proteins having NADPH oxidase activity in a plant improves tolerance to pathogen such as Sclerotinia sclerotiorum, and (ii) Ranjan et al. teach silencing GmRBOH (NADPH Oxidase) genes in plants, such as soybean leads to enhanced resistance to Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (necrotrophic fungi), it would have been obvious to reduce or eliminate endogenous plant NADPH oxidase activity by down-regulating and/or suppressing expression of any endogenous RBOH gene expression, including Applicant’s RBOHP encoding SEQ ID NO: 3 protein by using any technique of reducing and/or suppressing the expression of an endogenous plant gene including antisense/ dsRNA (siRNA) based techniques as taught by Kogel et al. (for example) to arrive at the Applicant’s invention with a reasonable expectation of success and without any surprising results.
Given NCBI teach that GenBank Sequence Accession NO. XP_003554649 has about 97.2% amino acid sequence identity to instant SEQ ID NO: 3, it would have been obvious and within the scope of an ordinary skill in the art to have designed DNA constructs specifically targeting to suppress endogenous expression of instant SEQ ID NO: 3 by using nucleotide sequence derived from GenBank Sequence Accession NO. XP_003554649, and using antisense and/or double stranded RNA (siRNA) gene suppression based approach as taught by Kogel et al. and/or to reduce or suppress the expression of instant SEQ ID NO: 3 and highly homologous RBOH proteins (e.g. even nonelected instant SEQ ID NO: 4) associated thereof to arrive at the Applicant’s invention with a reasonable expectation of success and without any surprising results.
While one of ordinary skill in the art would have suppressed or reduced the expression of endogenous RBOH gene expression for the purpose of improving resistance to Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (necrotrophic fungi) as discussed above, it would have been obvious that said transgenic plant would have also exhibited any other characteristics including increased drought tolerance in said transgenic plants exhibiting reduced or suppressed expression of endogenous RBOH gene because drought tolerance is related to the property of down-regulating expression of said RBOH gene expression in said transgenic plant cell or transgenic plant thereof. Obviously this would also naturally flow from the combined teachings of the cited prior art as discussed above in the rejection by screening said transgenic plants for other stresses, including abiotic stresses, such as drought etc., and thus arrive at the Applicant’s invention with a reasonable expectation of success and without any surprising results.
Applicant’s attention is drawn to MPEP 2145 [R-10.2019] II, 2nd paragraph which says:
“Prima Facie Obviousness Is Not Rebutted by Merely Recognizing Additional Advantages or Latent Properties Present But Not Recognized in the Prior Art”
"The fact that appellant has recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious." Ex parte Obiaya, 227 USPQ 58, 60 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1985) (The prior art taught combustion fluid analyzers which used labyrinth heaters to maintain the samples at a uniform temperature. Although appellant showed an unexpectedly shorter response time was obtained when a labyrinth heater was employed, the Board held this advantage would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art.). See also Lantech Inc. v. Kaufman Co. of Ohio Inc., 878 F.2d 1446, 12 USPQ2d 1076, 1077 (Fed. Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 1058 (1990) (unpublished — not citable as precedent) ("The recitation of an additional advantage associated with doing what the prior art suggests does not lend patentability to an otherwise unpatentable invention.").
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Thus, the claimed invention as a whole is prima facie obvious over the combined teachings of the prior art.
7. Claims 30-42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kogel et al. (US Patent Publication NO. 20080047033; Published February 21, 2008) in view of Ranjan et al. (APS.CPS Joint meeting , August 9-13, Minneapolis, Minnesota, Volume 104 (supplement 3), No. 11, 2014, pages S.31-S.138; Published 2014) and NCBI (GenBank Sequence Accession NO. XP_003554649, Published November 25, 2015) and further in view of Ji et al. (J Plant Biotechnol., 38:22-29, 2011; English translation provided).
Kogel et al. teachings are taught as supra.
Ranjan et al. teachings are taught as supra.
NCBI teachings are taught as supra.
Kogel et al., Ranjan et al. or NCBI do not teach that reducing or eliminating NADPH oxidase activity or expression of a RBOH protein in a plant results in increase in abiotic stress tolerance in said plant.
Ji et al. teach transgenic plants transformed with a DNA expression cassette comprising antisense sequences directed to reduce and/or eliminate expression of endogenous plant NADPH oxidase or RBOH gene encoding proteins. The antisense transgenic plants exhibited increased abiotic stress tolerance as compared to control. The abiotic stress tolerance included tolerance under high salt stress conditions. See in particular, abstract, Figures 1-7; materials and methods, results and discussion; pages 1-26 of the English translated document.
Given Ji et al. teach that inhibiting or reducing expression of endogenous plant NADPH oxidase or RBOH gene encoding proteins results in increased abiotic stress tolerance, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have used combined teachings of Kogel et al., Ranjan et al. and NCBI to evaluate abiotic stress (salt, drought, cold etc.) tolerance property of transgenic plants down-regulated for endogenous plant NADPH oxidase or RBOH gene encoding proteins, and thus obtain transgenic plants with resistance to Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (necrotrophic fungi) and tolerance to a variety of abiotic stresses, such as salt, drought, cold etc.
Conclusions
8. Claims 30-42 are rejected.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VINOD KUMAR whose telephone number is (571)272-4445. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30 am - 5.00 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Amjad A. Abraham can be reached on (571) 270-7058 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, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA).
/VINOD KUMAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1663
Prosecution Insights