Re-examines the Bruttel/Washburne/VanDongen BsaI/BsmBI restriction-site analysis. Reports that several of the closest bat sarbecoviruses (not only SARS-CoV-2) match the same “synthetic-looking” restriction pattern at all 11 sites, that Bruttel et al.’s reported rarity statistic was miscalculated (the correct chance-occurrence probability is roughly 60-fold higher than reported), and that assembling a genome the size and complexity of SARS-CoV-2 by the proposed seamless-ligation method would itself be technically and financially demanding. Concludes the endonuclease “fingerprint” does not indicate synthetic origin. relevance_note: the direct methodological rebuttal to this slice’s other lab-leak-side anchor (Bruttel et al.).