Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/494,759

FUNCTIONALIZED PYRANO[2,3-D]PYRIMIDIN-7-ONE DERIVATIVES AND METHODS FOR THEIR PREPARATION AND USE

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Oct 05, 2021
Examiner
KIFLE, BRUCK
Art Unit
1624
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
The Texas A&M University System
OA Round
4 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
4-5
OA Rounds
2y 0m
To Grant
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
1356 granted / 1712 resolved
+19.2% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+15.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 0m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
1739
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.9%
-39.1% vs TC avg
§103
12.2%
-27.8% vs TC avg
§102
13.0%
-27.0% vs TC avg
§112
53.7%
+13.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1712 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 . 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 February 25, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 12-16 and 20-23 are pending in this application. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 Claims 1, 12-16 and 20-23 are again rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claims contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to use the invention. The basis of this rejection is the same as given in the previous office action and is incorporated herein fully by reference. Applicants’ arguments have been fully considered but not persuasive. The claims have now been amended to a method “for inhibiting Abelson kinase 1 or Abelson kinase 2 in a subject having a disease or condition treatable by inhibiting Abelson kinase 1 or Abelson kinase 2, wherein the disease or condition is selected from the group consisting of corona virus infections, hematopoietic malignancies, and solid tumors.” It is still not possible for one skilled in the art to say for sure which hematopoietic malignancies or solid tumors are treatable by inhibiting Abelson kinase 1 or Abelson kinase 2. Hematopoietic malignancies and solid tumors are not a single disease, or cluster of closely related diseases. There are hundreds of hematopoietic malignancies and solid tumors, which have in common only some loss of controlled cell growth. Hematopoietic malignancies and solid tumors are highly heterogeneous at both the molecular and clinical level, something seen especially in, for example, the cancers of the breast, brain and salivary glands. They can occur in pretty much every part of the body. For example, leukemia is any malignant neoplasm of the blood-forming tissues. Leukemia can arise from many different sources. These include viruses such as EBV, which causes Burkitt's lymphoma, and HTLV-1, linked to certain T cell leukemias. Others are linked to genetic disorders, such as Fanconi's anemia, which is a familial disorder, and Down's syndrome. Other leukemias are caused by exposure to carcinogens such as benzene, and some are actually caused by treatment with other neoplastic agents. Still other leukemias arise from ionizing radiation, and many are idiopathic. Leukemias also differ greatly in the morphology, degree of differentiation, body location (e.g., bone marrow, lymphoid organs, etc.) There are dozens of leukemias. There are B-Cell Neoplasms such as B-cell prolymphocytic leukemia and Hairy cell leukemia (HCL, a chronic Lymphoid leukemia). There are T-Cell Neoplasms such as T-cell prolymphocytic leukemia, aggressive NK cell leukemia, adult T cell leukemia/lymphoma (ATLL), and T-cell granular Lymphocytic leukemia. There are different kinds of acute myeloid leukemias (undifferentiated AML, acute myeloblastic, acute myelomonocytic leukemia, acute monocytic leukemias, acute monoblastic, acute megakaryoblastic (AmegL), acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL), and erythroleukemia). There is also lymphoblastic leukemia, hypocellular acute myeloid leukemia, Ph-/BCR- myeloid leukemia, and acute basophilic leukemia. Chronic leukemias include chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL, which exists in a B-cell and a T-cell type), prolymphocytic leukemia (PLL), large granular lymphocytic leukemia (LGLL, which goes under several other names as well), chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML), chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML), chronic neutrophilic leukemia, chronic eosinophilic leukemia (CEL), and many others. With specific reference to cancer, Ex parte Kranz, 19 USPQ2d 1216, 1219 notes the “general unpredictability of the field [of] …anti-cancer treatment.” In re Application of Hozumi et al., 226 USPQ 353 notes the “fact that the art of cancer chemotherapy is highly unpredictable.” More generally, the invention is directed toward medicine and is therefore physiological in nature. It is well established that “the scope of enablement varies inversely with the degree of unpredictability of the factors involved,” and physiological activity is generally considered to be an unpredictable factor. See In re Fisher, 427 F.2d 833, 839, 166 USPQ 18, 24 (CCPA 1970). The scope of uses embraced by these claims are not remotely enabled based solely on instant compounds ability to inhibit Abelson kinase 1 and Abelson kinase 2. Applicants results in Tables 1 and 2 of the specification have been noted. Applicants have not demonstrated nor have they alleged there is any correlation between the in vitro assays they disclose and clinical efficacy against any disease. Case law is clear on this point. In an unpredictable art, such as cancer therapy, in vitro assays may be used for enablement only if there is a well-established correlation between the assay and clinical efficacy. Different types of cancers affect different organs and have different methods of growth and harm to the body, and different vulnerabilities. The skill thus depends on the particular cancer involved. There are some cancers where the chemotherapy skill level is high and there are multiple successful chemotherapeutic treatments. The mechanism in these situations, however, is not necessarily the same as is alleged for these compounds. MPEP 2164.01(a) states, “A conclusion of lack of enablement means that, based on the evidence regarding each of the above factors, the specification, at the time the application was filed, would not have taught one skilled in the art how to make and/or use the full scope of the claimed invention without undue experimentation. In re Wright, 999 F.2d 1557, 1562, 27 USPQ2d 1510, 1513 (Fed. Cir. 1993).” That conclusion is clearly justified here. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRUCK KIFLE whose telephone number is (571)272-0668. The examiner can normally be reached 8 AM - 6 PM, M-F. 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, Jeffrey H. Murray can be reached on 571-272-9023. 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. March 8, 2026 /BRUCK KIFLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1624
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 05, 2021
Application Filed
Aug 08, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Feb 11, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 19, 2025
Final Rejection — §112
Aug 22, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Aug 26, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 27, 2025
Final Rejection — §112
Feb 25, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 03, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600732
BIFUNCTIONAL COMPOUNDS FOR DEGRADING BTK VIA UBIQUITIN PROTEOSOME PATHWAY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595238
PROCESS FOR PRODUCING HEXAHYDRO 1,3,5-TRINITRO-1,3,5-TRIAZINE AND OCTAHYDRO-1,3,5,7-TETRANITRO-1,3,5,7-TETRAZOCINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583863
SYNTHETICALLY MODIFIABLE ION CHANNELS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577239
NOVEL SULFILIMINES OR SULFOXIMINES CONTAINING FUNGICIDAL HETEROCYCLIC COMPOUNDS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12566113
REVERSIBLE FIXING REAGENTS AND METHODS OF USE THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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

4-5
Expected OA Rounds
79%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+15.9%)
2y 0m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1712 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