U.S. Serial No. 15/602,991
`Response to Final Office Action Filed December 19, 2018
`
`Attorney Docket No. 44854-701308
`
`REMARKS
`
`Claims l-lO and 12-22 are currently pending in this application. With this amendment,
`
`claims 1, l4 and 15 are currently amended, and claims 23-38 are new. Support for the
`
`amendments to the claims can be found throughout the as-flled application and claims, including
`
`paragraphs 50 and 264. No new matter is believed to be introduced.
`
`Upon entry of this amendment, claims l-lO, 12-38 are pending and under examination.
`
`Entry of the claim amendments and allowance of the application is respectfully requested.
`
`1)
`
`Applicant-Initiated Interview of December 17, 2018
`
`Applicant thanks Examiner Zhang for the courteous telephonic interview of December
`
`17, 2018 with Applicant’s representative David Harburger. Potential claim amendments were
`
`discussed, along with the 103 rejections to the claims and the Tian reference. Applicant’s
`
`representative proposed amending claim 1 to include the language of wherein each of the at least
`
`20,000 polynucleotides is “at least 75 bases in length” and noted, in contrast, that the Tian
`
`reference discloses enrichment of short sequences (50-mers) by selection hybridization.
`
`Examiner Zhang suggested introduction of method claims into the claim set including such
`
`language.
`
`11)
`
`Claim Rejections — 35 USC § 103
`
`A) The Office Action rejects claims l-lO and 13-22 under 35 USC. § 103 as allegedly
`
`being obvious over Tian et al. (Nature 2004, 432: 1050-1054) (hereafter “Tian”). This rejection
`
`is respectfully traversed for at least the following reasons.
`
`Amended claim 1 recites a polynucleotide cDNA library, “wherein the polynucleotide
`
`cDNA library comprises at least 20,000 polynucleotides, wherein each of the at least 20,000
`
`polynucleotides is at least 75 bases in length and synthesized based on instructions provided in a
`
`computer readable non-transient medium for synthesis of preselected cDNA sequences, wherein
`
`at least 80% of the at least 20,000 polynucleotides have no errors compared to the preselected
`
`cDNA sequences received in the instructions provided in the computer readable non-transient
`
`medium, wherein each of the at least 20,000 polynucleotides comprises a first overlap region
`
`which is complementary to a second overlap region of another polynucleotide of the at least
`
`20,000 polynucleotides, such that a plurality of genes are formed when a subset of the at least
`
`

`

`U.S. Serial No. 15/602,991
`Response to Final Office Action Filed December 19, 2018
`
`Attorney Docket No. 44854-701308
`
`20,000 polynucleotides are assembled, and wherein the first overlap region comprises at least 10
`
`bases in length.”
`
`Applicant submits that the highlighted technical feature above of where each of the at
`
`least 20,000 polynucleotides is “at least 75 bases in length wherein at least 80% of the at least
`
`20,000 polynucleotides have no errors compared to the preselected cDNA sequences in the
`
`instructions provided in the computer readable non-transient medium” is not taught or suggested
`
`by Tian.
`
`Moreover, Tian as a whole provides express guidance as to generation of an oligomer
`
`library enriched for accuracy which are 50 bases in length —far shorter than that recited in claim
`
`1. Tian describes enzymatic cleavage of a library of 90-mers to generate 50-mers for enrichment
`
`by selective hybridization. See Figure 3 of Tian. It is not until after selection by hybridization of
`
`the 50-mer construction oligomers of Tian that a library with improved accuracy is generated:
`
`“[o]nly the correct upper 50-mer strand hybridizes well with left (L) then right (R) selection
`
`oligonucleotides (immobilized on beads in grey)” Tian at 1052 (emphasis added). Tian also
`
`describes that certain design constraints were employed using software for employment of the
`
`described enrichment process:
`
`Gene and oligonucleotide sequences were designed using the Java program CAD-
`PAM, to be described in detail elsewhere (J.T., H.G. and GO, manuscript in
`preparation). Basically, CAD-PAM uses constraints on the amino acid
`sequences, codon usage, messenger RNA secondary structure and restriction
`enzymes used to release the construction oligonucleotides in order to create
`nearly optimal, overlapping sets of n-mer
`(typically 50—mer) construction
`oligomers and shorter selection oligomers (typically 26-mer).
`Tian at 1063.
`
`For at least these reasons, Applicant respectfully requests that this rejection to
`
`independent claim 1 and dependent claims therefrom under 35 U.S.C. § 103 be withdrawn.
`
`B) The Office Action rejects claim 12 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as allegedly being obvious
`
`over Tian as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hodgson (US 2002/0025561 A1)
`
`(hereafter “Hodgson”) and Kini et al. (US 2009/0285 825 Al) (hereafter “Kini”). This rejection
`
`is respectfully traversed for at least the following reasons.
`
`Applicant submits that the cited disclosures of Hodgson and Kini fail to cure for the
`
`deficiencies of Tian as discussed above. For at least these reasons, Applicant respectfully
`
`requests that this rejection to claim 12 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 be withdrawn.
`
`-7-
`
`

`

`U.S. Serial No. 15/602,991
`Response to Final Office Action Filed December 19, 2018
`
`Attorney Docket No. 44854-701308
`
`CONCLUSION
`
`Applicant respectfully solicits the Examiner to expedite examination of this application to
`
`issuance. Should the Examiner have any questions, Applicant requests that the Examiner contact
`
`the undersigned at 858-350-2322. The Commissioner is hereby authorized to charge any fees that
`
`may be required, or credit any overpayment to Deposit Account No. 23-2415, referencing
`
`Attorney Docket No. 44854-701308.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
`
`A Professional Corporation
`
`
`Date: December 19 2018
`
`By:
`
`/DaVid S. Harburger/
`David S. Harburger
`Registration No. 65,159
`
`650 Page Mill Road
`Palo Alto, CA 94304
`(858) 350—2322
`Customer No. 021971
`
`

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.

We are unable to display this document.

PTO Denying Access

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket