Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 17/625,380

MAGEA10 SPECIFIC T CELL RECEPTORS AND THEIR USE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jul 27, 2023
Priority
Jul 09, 2019 — EU 19185192.2 +1 more
Examiner
ALLEN, MARIANNE P
Art Unit
1647
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Medigene Immunotherapies GmbH
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
60%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
78%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 60% of resolved cases
60%
Career Allowance Rate
592 granted / 990 resolved
At TC average
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+18.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
45 currently pending
Career history
1041
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
32.6%
-7.4% vs TC avg
§102
15.5%
-24.5% vs TC avg
§112
42.9%
+2.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 990 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 Objections Claims 3-15 are objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) as being in improper form because a multiple dependent claim cannot depend from another multiply dependent claim. In addition, claims must be dependent in the alternative only. Claim 3 depends upon both claims 1 and 2. Claims 4-6 are dependent upon any of the preceding claims. Claims 7-15 are dependent upon multiply dependent claims. See MPEP § 608.01(n). Accordingly, the claims 3-15 have not been further treated on the merits. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Border et al. (November 2018, of record). Border et al. discloses multiple T cell receptors specific for MGEA10. They bind to the epitope GLYDGMEHL (amino acids 254-262 of MAGEA10). See at least abstract, results section, and Figure 1. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jooss et al. (WO 2019/036688, published 21 February 2019, filed 17 August 2018, of record) in view of Border et al. Border et al. is applied as above and further teaches methods for identifying T cell receptors specific for MAGEA10 epitopes. See at least materials and methods section on page 9. Claim 79 of Jooss et al. is directed to an isolated antigen binding protein directed to an HLA-PEPTIDE target from Table A. An antigen binding protein (ABP) includes T cell receptors (TCR) and antigen binding portions thereof. See at least paragraph [0092]. SEQ ID NO: 2133 in Table A is SLLKFLAKV (i.e. identical to instant SEQ ID NO: 1), a fragment of the target MAGEA10 with HLA of HLA-A*02:01, HLA-A*02:03, HLA-A*02:04, and HLA-A*02:07. SEQ ID NO: 2134 is SLLKFLAK, a fragment of instant SEQ ID NO: 1, a fragment of the target MAGEA10 with HLA-A*03:01. See Table A on page 296. Claim 139 is directed to an engineered cell expressing a receptor comprising the antigen binding protein of any of the preceding claims (including claim 79). Claim 140 depends upon claim 139 and is directed to a T cell. It would have been obvious to identify and isolate a T cell receptor which specifically recognizes SEQ ID NO: 2133 (instant SEQ ID NO: 1) or SEQ ID NO: 2134 (a fragment of instant SEQ ID NO: 1) as suggested by Jooss et al. by using the methods of Border et al. One would have been motivated to do so in order to develop new T cell receptors for use in therapeutic applications. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARIANNE P ALLEN whose telephone number is (571)272-0712. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00-3:30 EST Monday-Friday. 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, Joanne Hama can be reached at 571-272-2911. 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. /Marianne P Allen/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1647 mpa
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 27, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 11, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12630609
TECHNIQUES FOR PREDICTING, DETECTING AND REDUCING ASPECIFIC PROTEIN INTERFERENCE IN ASSAYS INVOLVING IMMUNOGLOBULIN SINGLE VARIABLE DOMAINS
12y 2m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12617848
METHODS OF TREATING OCULAR PATHOLOGIES USING BIFUNCTIONAL MOLECULES THAT TARGET GROWTH FACTORS
4y 5m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Patent 12612440
MODIFIED BOVINE G-CSF POLYPEPTIDES AND THEIR USES
3y 4m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12606615
ANTI-FGF23 ANTIBODY OR ANTIBODY FRAGMENT THEREOF
1y 4m to grant Granted Apr 21, 2026
Patent 12600787
METHODS FOR THE TREATMENT OF THYROID EYE DISEASE
4y 1m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
60%
Grant Probability
78%
With Interview (+18.5%)
2y 10m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 990 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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