REMARKS
`
`Claims 1-30, 34 and 35 are examination in this application. Claims 1, 2, 7-10, 15, 17, 18, 22,
`
`29, 34 and 35 are amended herein to correct informalities. Claims 31-33 are withdrawn as being
`
`drawn to non-elected subject matter. Written support for the claim amendments is found
`
`throughout the specification and original claims. No prohibited new matter is added herein. Entry of
`
`the amendments and reconsideration of the application are requested.
`
`The arguments and contentions presented in the Office Action should not be construed as
`
`any acquiescence or agreement by Applicant with the stated reasoning therein regardless of
`
`whether or not the following remarks specifically address any particular argument or contention
`
`from the Office Action. Furthermore, although certain distinctions between the claims of the present
`
`application and the cited references are addressed below, these distinctions are not necessarily
`
`exhaustive.
`
`Claim Objections
`
`Claims 1, 2, 7-10, 15, 17, 22 and 29 are objected to because ofinformalities. See Office Action
`
`at Section No. 5-7. These claims have been amended in accordance with the Examiner’s suggestions.
`
`Withdrawal of the objections is requested in view of the amendments.
`
`Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. § 112
`
`Claims 17, 34 and 35 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112 (second paragraph) as being
`
`indefinite. See Office Action at Section No. 8-12. Claims 17, 34 and 35 have been amended in
`
`accordance with the Examiner’s suggestions. Claim 18 is amended for consistency with claim 17.
`
`Withdrawal of the rejection is requested in view of the amendments.
`
`Claims 8 and 15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112 (fourth paragraph) as being indefinite.
`
`See Office Action at Section No. 13-14. Claim 8 has been amended in accordance with the Examiner’s
`
`suggestion and Claim 9 has been amended to depend on claim 7. Withdrawal of the rejection is
`
`requested in view of the amendment.
`
`Claim 15 stands rejected because “the recitation of comprises SEQ ID NO: 3, 32-66, 623 and
`
`624 makesthis claim broader than claim 1, and therefore, not further limiting” (see Office Action at
`
`Section No. 14). Without acquiescing to the propriety of the rejection and solely in an effort to
`
`expedite prosecution, Applicant has amended claim 15 to removethe recitation of SEQ ID NO: 623
`
`and 624. Withdrawal of the rejection is requested in view of the amendment.
`
`Double Patenting Rejections
`
`Claims 1-30 and 34-35 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory double patenting as being
`
`unpatentable over claims 1, 2, 4, 6-8, 10, 12, 13, 19, 23 and 27 of U.S. Patent No. 10,865,400. See
`
`Office Action at Section No. 16.
`
`

`

`Claims 1-30 and 34-35 are provisionally rejected on the ground of non-statutory double
`
`patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-3, 5-10 and 14-18 of co-pending Application No.
`
`18/340,786. See Office Action at Section No. 17.
`
`Applicant concurrently files terminal disclaimers obviating the rejections in view of the cited
`
`patent and patent application. Withdrawal of the double patenting rejections is requested in view of
`
`the terminal disclaimers.
`
`Conclusion
`
`In view of the foregoing, Applicant awaits a favorable action on the merits. Should the
`
`Examiner feel that there are any issues outstanding after consideration of this response, the
`
`Examiner is invited to contact the undersigned representative to expedite prosecution.
`
`Date: May 21, 2024
`
`MORGAN LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
`
`1111 Pennsylvania Ave, NW
`Washington, DC 20004
`Customer Number: 28977
`
`Telephone: 202.739.5139
`robert.smyth@morganlewis.com
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`By: /Kalpesh V. Upadhye/
`Kalpesh V. Upadhye, Ph.D.
`Registration No. 70,236
`
`Robert Smyth, Ph.D.
`Registration No. 50,801
`
`