Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/653,221

METHOD OF TREATING CANCER

Non-Final OA §102§DP
Filed
Mar 02, 2022
Examiner
ZARA, JANE J
Art Unit
1637
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Targimmune Therapeutics AG
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
71%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
87%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 71% — above average
71%
Career Allow Rate
769 granted / 1085 resolved
+10.9% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+15.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
38 currently pending
Career history
1123
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.0%
-35.0% vs TC avg
§103
29.1%
-10.9% vs TC avg
§102
17.9%
-22.1% vs TC avg
§112
31.2%
-8.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1085 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §DP
DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This Office action is in response to the communication filed 10-31-25. Claims 21-45 are pending in the instant application. Election/Restrictions Claims 37-45 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention or species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 10-31-25. Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, a single LPEI:PEG ratio of 1:1, a single LPEI linker bond comprising NH-CO-, the diconjugate of claim 33(i), claims 21-36, in the reply filed on 10-31-25 is acknowledged. Claim Objections Claim 26 is objected to because of the following informalities: in claim 26, line 8, “of of” appears to be a grammatical error. Replacing “of of” with – or of – would perhaps be remedial. Appropriate correction is required. 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 21-31, 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Levitski et al (US 2012/0021006). Levitski et al (US 2012/0021006) teach pharmaceutical compositions comprising polyplexes comprising dsRNA of polyinosinic polycytidylic (poly I:C) acid double stranded RNA non-covalently associated with a polyethylene glycol (PEG) moiety, which PEG is conjugated via a linker to a targeting moiety capable of binding to a cancer antigen, which PEG moiety optionally forms an NH-CO bond with a linear polyethyleneimine (PEI), which linker optionally forms an S-S, NH-CO-, CO-NH-, -S-C-, O-CO-, or CO-O- bond with a targeting moiety, or which linker optionally comprises -CO-R2-Rx-R3 or a peptide moiety consisting of 3-7 amino acid residues, which R2 optionally comprises an alkylene, alkenylene, alkynylene or a heterarylenediyl (see esp. the abstract, pages 3-8, claims 1-14). Claim(s) 21-31, 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Shir et al (WO 2004/045491). Shir et al (WO 2004/045491) teach pharmaceutical compositions comprising polyplexes comprising dsRNA of polyinosinic polycytidylic (poly I:C) acid double stranded RNA non-covalently associated with a polyethylene glycol (PEG) moiety, which PEG is conjugated via a linker to a targeting moiety capable of binding to a cancer antigen, which PEG moiety optionally forms an NH-CO bond with a linear polyethyleneimine (PEI), which linker optionally forms an S-S, NH-CO-, CO-NH-, -S-C-, O-CO-, or CO-O- bond with a targeting moiety, or which linker optionally comprises -CO-R2-Rx-R3 or a peptide moiety consisting of 3-7 amino acid residues, which R2 optionally comprises an alkylene, alkenylene, alkynylene or a heterarylenediyl (see esp. the Abstract, pages 1-7, Table 2, pages 9, 10, 26-28, 34-36, 53-54). Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 21-36 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-25 of U.S. Patent No. 10,278,991. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both sets of claims are drawn to pharmaceutical compositions comprising polyplexes comprising dsRNA of polyinosinic polycytidylic (poly I:C) acid double stranded RNA non-covalently associated with a polyethylene glycol (PEG) moiety, which PEG is conjugated via a linker to a targeting moiety capable of binding to a cancer antigen, which PEG moiety optionally forms an NH-CO bond with a linear polyethyleneimine (PEI), which linker optionally forms an S-S, NH-CO-, CO-NH-, -S-C-, O-CO-, or CO-O- bond with a targeting moiety, or which linker optionally comprises -CO-R2-Rx-R3 or a peptide moiety consisting of 3-7 amino acid residues, which R2 optionally comprises an alkylene, alkenylene, alkynylene or a heterarylenediyl, and which polyplex comprises a deconjugate comprising formula (i)-(viii). . Claims 21-36 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-23 of U.S. Patent No. 10,543,232. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both sets of claims are drawn to pharmaceutical compositions comprising polyplexes comprising dsRNA of polyinosinic polycytidylic (poly I:C) acid double stranded RNA non-covalently associated with a polyethylene glycol (PEG) moiety, which PEG is conjugated via a linker to a targeting moiety capable of binding to a cancer antigen, which PEG moiety optionally forms an NH-CO bond with a linear polyethyleneimine (PEI), which linker optionally forms an S-S, NH-CO-, CO-NH-, -S-C-, O-CO-, or CO-O- bond with a targeting moiety, or which linker optionally comprises -CO-R2-Rx-R3 or a peptide moiety consisting of 3-7 amino acid residues, which R2 optionally comprises an alkylene, alkenylene, alkynylene or a heterarylenediyl, and which polyplex comprises a deconjugate comprising formula (i)-(viii). Conclusion Certain papers related to this application may be submitted to Art Unit 1637 by facsimile transmission. The faxing of such papers must conform with the notices published in the Official Gazette, 1156 OG 61 (November 16, 1993) and 1157 OG 94 (December 28, 1993) (see 37 C.F.R. ' 1.6(d)). The official fax telephone number for the Group is 571-273-8300. NOTE: If Applicant does submit a paper by fax, the original signed copy should be retained by applicant or applicant's representative. NO DUPLICATE COPIES SHOULD BE SUBMITTED so as to avoid the processing of duplicate papers in the Office. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jane Zara whose telephone number is (571) 272-0765. The examiner’s office hours are generally Monday-Friday, 10:30am - 7pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Jennifer Dunston, can be reached on (571)-272-2916. Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application should be directed to the Group receptionist whose telephone number is (703) 308-0196. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). Jane Zara 1-8-26 /JANE J ZARA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1637
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 02, 2022
Application Filed
Jan 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595482
LINKAGE MODIFIED OLIGOMERIC COMPOUNDS AND USES THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589115
HAEMATOPOIETIC STEM CELL TREATMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582668
METHODS FOR THE TREATMENT OF ALPHA-1 ANTITRYPSIN DEFICIENCY (AATD)
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576131
ALTERING INFLAMMATORY STATES OF IMMUNE CELLS IN VIVO BY MODULATING CELLULAR ACTIVATION STATES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12576101
APPLICATION BASED ON NUCLEOTIDES OF LACTOBACILLUS RHAMNOSUS TO PREPARE A COMPOSITION FOR ANTI-LIPOGENESIS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
71%
Grant Probability
87%
With Interview (+15.8%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1085 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