Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 25, 2026
Application No. 19/684,891

METHODS FOR ENCLOSING AND ANALYZING A CELL IN A FLUIDIC DEVICE

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
May 21, 2026
Priority
Mar 22, 2022 — provisional 63/322,601 +3 more
Examiner
HORLICK, KENNETH R
Art Unit
1681
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Cellanome Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 0m
Est. Remaining
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allowance Rate
831 granted / 1052 resolved
+19.0% vs TC avg
Strong +15% interview lift
Without
With
+15.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
1084
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
7.9%
-32.1% vs TC avg
§103
28.3%
-11.7% vs TC avg
§102
9.9%
-30.1% vs TC avg
§112
35.0%
-5.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1052 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . OBJECTION 2. The specification is objected to because of the following informality: the continuation information must be updated to indicate the current status of the parent applications. NON-PRIOR ART REJECTION 3. 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 1-28 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. Claims 1-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential steps, such omission amounting to a gap between the steps. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted steps are: forming chambers or enclosures using a polymer prescursor that is polymerized to enclose cells on a surface of a microfluidic device. Lacking this critical step, it cannot be understood how steps (a) – (c) of independent claim 1 function together so as to accomplish a method of cellular analysis. For example, there is no nexus between cells disposed adjacent to a surface comprising capture sites comprising capture oligonucleotides in step (a), and nucleic acids released and captured in steps (b) and (c). In other words, there is no connection or relation between any given cell and any given capture site, so it cannot be determined how a functional analysis is to be accomplished. Clarification is required. 4. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph 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 the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: 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. Claims 1-28 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Independent claim 1 recites steps of disposing a plurality of cells adjacent to a surface, releasing nucleic acids from cells, and capturing nucleic acids with capture oligonucleotides. The Office does not find support in the specification for a method which is this broad, such as would support that the inventors contemplated and were in possession of the method as now claimed. Thus, the claims comprise new matter. All of the methods described in the specification are in the context of enclosing cells in chambers or enclosures within a microfluidic device using a polymer precursor that is polymerized. If this rejection is traversed, it is requested that support be pointed to in the specification with particularity, as in page, paragraph, or line numbers. CONCLUSION 5. Due to the above indefiniteness issue, a complete search and analysis of the relevant prior art was not possible. Based on the disclosed invention, the Office cites Varadarajan et al. (US 2021/0018503) and Pishko et al. (US 2003/0175824) as the closest prior art. 6. No claims are allowable. 7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH R HORLICK whose telephone number is (571)272-0784. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Thurs. 8:30 - 6:30. 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, Gary Benzion can be reached at 571-272-0782. 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. 09/28/26 /KENNETH R HORLICK/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1681
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 21, 2026
Application Filed
Oct 01, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12747466
ANALYSIS OF NUCLEIC ACIDS ASSOCIATED WITH EXTRACELLULAR VESICLES
3y 4m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12735751
SYSTEMS AND METHODS TO DETECT RARE MUTATIONS AND COPY NUMBER VARIATION
11m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12729401
CHIMERIC AMPLICON ARRAY SEQUENCING
3y 9m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12729402
METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR PROCESSING POLYNUCLEOTIDES
1y 5m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12716094
Methods of Producing Ribosomal Ribonucleic Acid Complexes
3y 7m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
79%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+15.3%)
2y 5m (~2y 0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1052 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month