Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 17/059,025

USE OF 2,3,5-SUBSTITUTED THIOPHENE COMPOUND FOR ENHANCEMENT OF RADIOTHERAPY

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Nov 25, 2020
Examiner
CHEN, PO-CHIH
Art Unit
1621
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Pharos Ibio Co., LTD.
OA Round
5 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
553 granted / 740 resolved
+14.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+13.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
52 currently pending
Career history
792
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
27.5%
-12.5% vs TC avg
§102
20.0%
-20.0% vs TC avg
§112
31.8%
-8.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 740 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . DETAILED ACTION A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 10/1/2025 has been entered. As filed, claims 1-4 and 8 are pending; and claims 5-7 and 9-11 are cancelled. Response to Amendments/Remarks Applicant’s amendments/remarks, filed 9/4/2025, with respect to claims 5-7 and 9-11, have been fully considered and are entered. The status for each rejection in the previous Office Action is set out below. The § 103(a) rejection of claims 5-7 and 9-11 by the combined teaching of Sim and Bae is withdrawn per amendments. The § 103(a) rejection of claims 5-7 and 9-11 by the combined teaching of Sim and Lu is withdrawn per amendments. Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: The amendment filed 11/25/2020 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows: “each of which is incorporated by reference herein in its entirety”. MPEP 211.02 and MPEP 201.06(c)(IV) state the following in regard to “Incorporation by Reference” and PCT Rule 20.6, Rule 20.7 and Rule 4.18 are directed specifically to International applications: MPEP 211.02, in-part For applications filed on or after September 21, 2004, a claim under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or 120 and 37 CFR 1.78 for benefit of a prior-filed provisional application, nonprovisional application, international application designating the United States, or international design application designating the United States that was present on the filing date of the continuation or divisional application, or the nonprovisional application claiming benefit of a prior-filed provisional application, is considered an incorporation by reference of the prior-filed application as to inadvertently omitted material, subject to the conditions and requirements of 37 CFR 1.57(b). The purpose of 37 CFR 1.57(b) is to provide a safeguard for applicants when all or a portion of the specification and/or drawing(s) is (are) inadvertently omitted from an application. See MPEP § 201.06 and 217. However, applicants are encouraged to provide in the specification an explicit incorporation by reference statement to the prior-filed application(s) for which benefit is claimed under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or 120 if applicants do not wish the incorporation by reference to be limited to inadvertently omitted material pursuant to 37 CFR 1.57(b). See 37 CFR 1.57(c). See also MPEP §§ 217 and MPEP § 608.01(p). MPEP 201.06(c)(IV), in-part 201.06(c) 37 CFR 1.53(b) and 37 CFR 1.63(d) Divisional-Continuation Procedure [R-07.2015] IV. INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE An applicant may incorporate by reference the prior application by including, in the continuing application-as-filed, an explicit statement that such specifically enumerated prior application or applications are “hereby incorporated by reference.” The statement must appear in the specification. See 37 CFR 1.57(c) and MPEP § 608.01(p). The inclusion of this incorporation by reference statement will permit an applicant to amend the continuing application to include subject matter from the prior application(s), without the need for a petition provided the continuing application is entitled to a filing date notwithstanding the incorporation by reference. For applications filed prior to September 21, 2004, the incorporation by reference statement may appear in the transmittal letter or in the specification. Note that for applications filed prior to September 21, 2004, if applicants used a former version of the transmittal letter form provided by the USPTO, the incorporation by reference statement could only be relied upon to add inadvertently omitted material to the continuation or divisional application. An incorporation by reference statement added after an application’s filing date is not effective because no new matter can be added to an application after its filing date (see 35 U.S.C. 132(a) ). If an incorporation by reference statement is included in an amendment to the specification to add a benefit claim under 35 U.S.C. 120 after the filing date of the application, the amendment would not be proper. When a benefit claim under 35 U.S.C. 120 is submitted after the filing of an application, the reference to the prior application cannot include an incorporation by reference statement of the prior application. See Dart Indus. v. Banner, 636 F.2d 684, 207 USPQ 273 (C.A.D.C. 1980). 20.6 Confirmation of Incorporation by Reference of Elements and Parts (a) The applicant may submit to the receiving Office, within the applicable time limit under Rule 20.7, a written notice confirming that an element or part is incorporated by reference in the international application under Rule 4.18, accompanied by: (i) a sheet or sheets embodying the entire element as contained in the earlier application or embodying the part concerned; (ii) where the applicant has not already complied with Rule 17.1(a), (b) or (b-bis) in relation to the priority document, a copy of the earlier application as filed; (iii) where the earlier application is not in the language in which the international application is filed, a translation of the earlier application into that language or, where a translation of the international application is required under Rule 12.3(a) or 12.4(a), a translation of the earlier application into both the language in which the international application is filed and the language of that translation; and (iv) in the case of a part of the description, claims or drawings, an indication as to where that part is contained in the earlier application and, where applicable, in any translation referred to in item (iii). (b) Where the receiving Office finds that the requirements of Rule 4.18 and paragraph (a) have been complied with and that the element or part referred to in paragraph (a) is completely contained in the earlier application concerned, that element or part shall be considered to have been contained in the purported international application on the date on which one or more elements referred to in Article 11(1)(iii) were first received by the receiving Office. (c) Where the receiving Office finds that a requirement under Rule 4.18 or paragraph (a) has not been complied with or that the element or part referred to in paragraph (a) is not completely contained in the earlier application concerned, the receiving Office shall proceed as provided for in Rule 20.3(b)(i), 20.5(b) or 20.5(c), as the case may be. 20.7 Time Limit (a) The applicable time limit referred to in Rules 20.3(a) and (b), 20.4, 20.5(a), (b) and (c), and 20.6(a) shall be: (i) where an invitation under Rule 20.3(a) or 20.5(a), as applicable, was sent to the applicant, two months from the date of the invitation; (ii) where no such invitation was sent to the applicant, two months from the date on which one or more elements referred to in Article 11(1)(iii) were first received by the receiving Office. (b) Where neither a correction under Article 11(2) nor a notice under Rule 20.6(a) confirming the incorporation by reference of an element referred to in Article 11(1)(iii)(d) or (e) is received by the receiving Office prior to the expiration of the applicable time limit under paragraph (a), any such correction or notice received by that Office after the expiration of that time limit but before it sends a notification to the applicant under Rule 20.4(i) shall be considered to have been received within that time limit. 4.18 Statement of Incorporation by Reference Where the international application, on the date on which one or more elements referred to in Article 11(1)(iii) were first received by the receiving Office, claims the priority of an earlier application, the request may contain a statement that, where an element of the international application referred to in Article 11(1)(iii)(d) or (e) or a part of the description, claims or drawings referred to in Rule 20.5(a) is not otherwise contained in the international application but is completely contained in the earlier application, that element or part is, subject to confirmation under Rule 20.6, incorporated by reference in the international application for the purposes of Rule 20.6. Such a statement, if not contained in the request on that date, may be added to the request if, and only if, it was otherwise contained in, or submitted with, the international application on that date. The instant application is a 371 application which has an International filing date of 5/29/2019. See a partial capture of the BIB sheet of the instant application below. PNG media_image1.png 358 588 media_image1.png Greyscale The incorporation by reference statement is being added by way of a Preliminary Amendment filed 11/25/2020, which is after the instant application's International filing date of 5/29/2019. Therefore, the “incorporation by reference” statement being added to the instant specification by way of the Preliminary Amendment is deemed new matter. Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a) 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 5-7 and 9-11 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 pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Applicant’s amendment with respect to amended claims 5 and 7 herein has been fully considered but is deemed to insert new matter into the claims since the specification as originally filed does not provide support for the newly added limitation of “irradiating the subject with radiation at 3 Gy twice”, as instantly claimed. The instant specification and the originally filed claim (i.e. filed 11/25/2020) only provide support for the administration of both the instant compound and radiation at 3 Gy twice at an interval of one week or 7 days and thus, “irradiating the subject with radiation at 3 Gy twice” encompasses irradiating the subject with radiation at 3 Gy twice without the administration of the instant compound twice at any time interval, which is considered new matter. PNG media_image2.png 464 1254 media_image2.png Greyscale (pg. 5, paragraph 0025) PNG media_image3.png 264 1260 media_image3.png Greyscale (pg. 16, paragraph 00100) Adequate written description means that, in the specification, the applicant must “convey with reasonable clarity to those skilled in the art that, as of the filing date sought, he or she was in possession of the [claimed] invention.” Vas-Cath, Inc. v. Mahurkar, 935 F.2d 1555, 1563-64 [19 USPQ2d 1111] (Fed. Cir. 1991). See MPEP 2163 regarding the guidelines for the written description requirement: "The proscription against the introduction of new matter in a patent application (35 U.S.C. 132 and 251) serves to prevent an applicant from adding information that goes beyond the subject matter originally filed. See In re Rasmussen, 650 F.2d 1212, 1214, 211 USPQ 323, 326 (CCPA 1981). See MPEP § 2163.06 through § 2163.07 for a more detailed discussion of the written description requirement and its relationship to new matter. The claims as filed in the original specification are part of the disclosure and, therefore, if an application as originally filed contains a claim disclosing material not found in the remainder of the specification, the applicant may amend the specification to include the claimed subject matter. In re Benno, 768 F.2d 1340, 226 USPQ 683 (Fed. Cir. 1985). Thus, the written description requirement prevents an applicant from claiming subject matter that was not adequately described in the specification as filed. New or amended claims which introduce elements or limitations which are not supported by the as-filed disclosure violate the written description requirement. See, e.g., In re Lukach, 442 F.2d 967, 169 USPQ 795 (CCPA 1971) (subgenus range was not supported by generic disclosure and specific example within the subgenus range); In re Smith, 458 F.2d 1389, 1395, 173 USPQ 679, 683 (CCPA 1972) (a subgenus is not necessarily described by a genus encompassing it and a species upon which it reads).” Regarding claims 6 and 9, the claims are dependent of claim 5, and they failed correct the defective issue of claim 5, which rendered the claim improper. Regarding claims 10 and 11, the claims are dependent of claim 7, and they failed correct the defective issue of claim 7, which rendered the claim improper. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b) 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 7, 10, and 11 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. Regarding claim 7, the claim recites the phrase, “the cancer”, wherein the word, “the”, requires antecedent basis, and it is unclear where applicant has defined “a” cancer. Without antecedent basis, the claim is rendered indefinite. Regarding claim 11, the claim is dependent of claim 7, and claim 11 recites the phrase, “the composition”, wherein the word, “the”, requires antecedent basis, and it is unclear where applicant has defined “a” composition in claim 7 or 11. Without antecedent basis, the claim is rendered indefinite. Regarding claim 10, the claim is dependent of claim 7, and it failed to correct the indefiniteness issue of claim 7, which rendered the claim indefinite. Claim Objections Claims 5 and 7 are objected to because of the following informalities: Regarding claim 5, the claim recites the phrase, “A method of anticancer radiotherapy, the method comprising steps of: administering to a subject in need thereof an effective amount of a compound represent by the following Formula 1 or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof for enhancing radiotherapy”. Such expression can be clarified by reciting -- A method of enhancing anticancer radiotherapy, the method comprising steps of: administering to a subject in need thereof an effective amount of a compound represent by Regarding claim 7, the claim recites the phrase, “A method for enhancing the effect of radiotherapy, the method comprising a step of administering to a subject in need thereof an effective amount of a compound represent by the following Formula 1 or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof for enhancing radiotherapy”. Such expression can be clarified by reciting -- A method for enhancing --. Appropriate correction is required. Conclusion Claims 5-7 and 9-11 are rejected. Claims 5 and 7 are objected. Claims 1-4 and 8 are cancelled. Telephone Inquiry Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PO-CHIH CHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7243. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10:00 am to 6:00 pm. 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, Clinton Brooks can be reached at (571)270-7682. 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. /PO-CHIH CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1621
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 25, 2020
Application Filed
Aug 15, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Nov 22, 2023
Response Filed
Mar 04, 2024
Final Rejection — §112
Jun 12, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 30, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Sep 03, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 28, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Mar 28, 2025
Response Filed
Jun 01, 2025
Final Rejection — §112
Sep 04, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 01, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 07, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 27, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Mar 30, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595225
METHOD FOR PRODUCING ASYMMETRIC LINEAR CARBONATE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12582632
INHIBITION OF NEUROLOGICAL INJURIES DUE TO INFECTIONS VIA ADMINISTRATION OF BUTANETAP AND ANALOGS THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12571801
Tandem Activity-Based Sensing and Labeling Strategy for Reactive Oxygen Species Imaging
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12552792
SOLID FORMS OF AN FGFR INHIBITOR AND PROCESSES FOR PREPARING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12552782
Analogs of Nitrofuran Antibiotics to Combat Resistance
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
75%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+13.8%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 740 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

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

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month