Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/433,812

MESOPOROUS SILICA PARTICLES COMPOSITIONS FOR VIRAL DELIVERY

Non-Final OA §103§112§DP
Filed
Aug 25, 2021
Examiner
EBBINGHAUS, BRIANA NOEL
Art Unit
1632
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Novartis AG
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
54%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 11m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 54% of resolved cases
54%
Career Allow Rate
30 granted / 55 resolved
-5.5% vs TC avg
Strong +68% interview lift
Without
With
+67.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 11m
Avg Prosecution
55 currently pending
Career history
110
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
6.3%
-33.7% vs TC avg
§103
29.1%
-10.9% vs TC avg
§102
18.7%
-21.3% vs TC avg
§112
32.0%
-8.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 55 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112 §DP
DETAILED ACTION 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 . Claim Status Claims 1, 25, 27, 60, 74, 87, 109, 117 and 119-127 are pending. Claims 25, 27, 60, 74, 87 and 109 are withdrawn. Claims 1, 117 and 119-127 are under examination. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 29th, September, 2025 has been entered. Species Rejoinder The species election requirement between surface modification with a single molecular formula on the first population of mesoporous silica nanoparticles, as set forth in the Lack of Unity mailed on 31st, May, 2024 has been reconsidered in view of Applicant’s amendments. The structure of: PNG media_image1.png 237 218 media_image1.png Greyscale and N,N,N-trimethylpropn-1-ammonium, drawn to a previously non-elected species is no longer withdrawn from consideration. In view of the above noted withdrawal of the species election requirement, applicant is advised that if any claim presented in a continuation or divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is allowable in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or nonstatutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application. Once a species election requirement is withdrawn, the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 121 are no longer applicable. See In re Ziegler, 443 F.2d 1211, 1215, 170 USPQ 129, 131-32 (CCPA 1971). See also MPEP § 804.01. New Claim Objections Claim 126 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 126 recites “conjugated to” which contains the preposition “to” as an option followed by the alternative options “(i) on the” or “(ii) to a” which each also include an additional preposition. Therefore, this would be read as “conjugated to on the” for option (i) or “conjugated to to a” as option (ii) which unnecessarily include two back to back prepositions. It is recommended that Applicant amend “conjugated to” to “conjugated” to remove the extra preposition. Appropriate correction is required. Withdrawn Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112a Written Description The rejection of claim 129 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 as set forth in the previous office action is withdrawn in view of the cancellation of this claim. New 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 1, 117 and 119-127 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. Claim 1 recites the following structure: PNG media_image2.png 145 111 media_image2.png Greyscale Which includes “X-.” The claim does not define what “X-” encompasses. The instant specification states “X is a functional group”(pg. 38) which does not provide additional structure and causes additional uncertainty as to the scope of “X” because “X” as pictured appears to be a counter-ion, not a functional group. Therefore, because it is uncertain what the scope of “X” encompasses, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear. By nature of their ultimate dependency on claim 1, claims 117 and 119-127 are also rejected. Withdrawn Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The rejection of claims 1 and 117 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ortac et al. (US-2016/0067191-A1; henceforth “Ortac”) in view of Lee et al. (US-2010/0104650-A1; henceforth “Lee”) as set forth in the previous office action is withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendments. The rejection of claim 2, 110-111, 116, 118 and 129 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ortac et al. (US-2016/0067191-A1; henceforth “Ortac”) in view of Lee et al. (US-2010/0104650-A1; henceforth “Lee”) as set forth in the previous office action is withdrawn in view of the cancellation of these claims. The rejection of claims 119-127 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ortac et al. (US-2016/0067191-A1; henceforth “Ortac”) in view of Lee et al. (US-2010/0104650-A1; henceforth “Lee”) as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Barrett et al. (US-20180133296-A1; see IDS filed 10th, May, 2022; henceforth “Barrett”) as set forth in the previous office action are withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendments. Conclusion No claim is allowable. Correspondence Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIANA N EBBINGHAUS whose telephone number is (703)756-4548. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 AM to 5:30 PM ET. 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, Peter Paras can be reached at (571) 272-4517. 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. /BRIANA N EBBINGHAUS/Examiner, Art Unit 1632 /VALARIE E BERTOGLIO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1632
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 25, 2021
Application Filed
Oct 21, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112, §DP
Mar 28, 2025
Response Filed
Apr 21, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112, §DP
Sep 29, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 06, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 26, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112, §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12569526
ONCOLYTIC VIRUS PLATFORM TO TREAT HEMATOLOGICAL CANCER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12565663
MATRIX ATTACHMENT REGIONS AND USES IN PROMOTING GENE EXPRESSION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12565639
METHODS FOR DIFFERENTIATING DOPAMINERGIC NEURONS FROM STEM CELLS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12553045
NOVEL CRISPR DNA TARGETING ENZYMES AND SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12553034
UNIFIED IN-VITRO PROCESS FOR OBTAINING LUNG CELLS FROM PLURIPOTENT STEM CELLS
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
54%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+67.5%)
3y 11m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 55 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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