DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Claim Status
1. Claims 6 is pending and under examination on the merits.
Claims 9-10 are withdrawn.
Claims 1-5 and 7-8 are cancelled.
Election/Restrictions
2. Newly submitted claims 9-10 directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed because the elected invention of claim 6 is directed to a process for improving sprouting resistance of wheat and the invention of claims 9-10 are directed to a kit for negatively regulating seed dormancy and improving sprouting resistance within the TaCaM-3A gene. The process of claim 6 can be practiced with another materially different product and the product of claim 9 can be used in a materially different process. Furthermore, the method of claim 6 is limited to wheat and the product of claim 9 is not.
Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Furthermore, Applicant’s original election of claims 2-8, filed January 18, 2026, was submitted without traverse. Accordingly, claims 9-10 are withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
To preserve a right to petition, the reply to this action must distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement. Otherwise, the election shall be treated as a final election without traverse. Traversal must be timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are subsequently added, applicant must indicate which of the subsequently added claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
Response to Arguments – Objections to the Drawings
3. Applicant’s remarks and amendments dated April 15, 2026 have overcome the objections of record.
Response to Arguments – Specification
4. Applicant’s remarks and amendments dated April 15, 2026 have overcome the objections of record.
Response to Arguments – Claim Objections
5. Claims 1-5 and 7-8 have been cancelled; therefore, any objections and/or rejections to these claims are rendered moot.
Applicant’s amendments dated April 15, 2026 have been fully considered and necessitate new grounds of objection.
The amendment(s) to claim 6 has not been properly entered in accordance with 37 CFR 1.121. Newly added text must be underlined and deleted text must be either bracketed or struck-through (see MPEP 714). In lieu of a notice of non-compliance, the Examiner has elected to herein examine the improperly amended claim for the purpose of compact prosecution. Applicant is required to properly enter the amendments to the claim in accordance with 37 CFR 1.121 or Applicant may receive a notice of a non-compliant amendment in any subsequent response from the Office.
Claim Objections
6. Claim 6 is objected to because of the following:
The claim has not been properly amended in accordance with 37 CFR 1.121. Newly added text must be underlined and deleted text must be either bracketed or struck-through (see MPEP 714).
Ln. 2 contains a grammatical error; the comma between “wheat” and “comprising” is improper and should be deleted. Similarly, the comma after “CRISPR/Cas9 system” in ln. 3 is improper and should be removed.
Appropriate correction is required.
Response to Arguments – Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
7. Claims 2-3 have been cancelled; therefore, any objections and/or rejections to these claims are rendered moot. However, Applicant’s amendments filed April 15, 2026 have necessitated a new ground of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
8. 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.
9. Claim 6 is 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.
The metes and bounds of claim 6 are indefinite because claim 6 recites a method without an active method step and does not result or conclude in the improvement of sprouting resistance in wheat.
Appropriate correction is required.
Response to Arguments – Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(d)
10. Claim 3 has been cancelled; therefore, any objections and/or rejections to this claim is rendered moot.
Response to Arguments – Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
11. Claims 1-3 have been cancelled; therefore, any objections and/or rejections to these claims are rendered moot.
Response to Arguments – Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
12. Claims 1-5 and 7-8 have been cancelled; therefore, any objections and/or rejections to these claims are rendered moot.
Conclusion
13. No claim is allowed. The Examiner attempted to telephonically contact attorney of record Nitin Kaushik on May 13, 2026 at 908-560-7265, as listed in the remarks dated April 15, 2026, to discuss a potential Examiner’s Amendment to overcome the remaining rejections of record. However, no response has been received.
14. 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.
15. The closest prior art, Gao et al. (US-2018/0208939-A1, published 07/26/2018 (previously cited)), teaches wheat variety KN199[0162], which inherently comprises SEQ ID NO:1 (see the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102 in Non-Final Rejection dated March 17, 2026). However, Gao is silent to SEQ ID NO:1 and its function, does not teach editing SEQ ID NO:1, and does not teach a method for improving sprouting resistance comprising reducing the activity of SEQ ID NO:1 and/or its gene product.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Examiner’s Contact Information
16. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEQUANTARIUS J SPEED whose telephone number is (703)756-4779. The examiner can normally be reached M-F; 9AM-5PM ET.
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, Amjad Abraham can be reached at (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 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.
/DEQUANTARIUS JAVON SPEED/Junior Examiner, Art Unit 1663
/Amjad Abraham/SPE, Art Unit 1663
Prosecution Insights