Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/712,479

PLASMONICS-ACTIVE METAL NANOSTAR COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS OF USE

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Apr 04, 2022
Examiner
HARTLEY, MICHAEL G
Art Unit
1618
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Duke University
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
33%
Grant Probability
At Risk
2-3
OA Rounds
4y 10m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 33% of cases
33%
Career Allow Rate
21 granted / 63 resolved
-26.7% vs TC avg
Strong +78% interview lift
Without
With
+78.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 10m
Avg Prosecution
12 currently pending
Career history
75
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.5%
-37.5% vs TC avg
§103
41.4%
+1.4% vs TC avg
§102
20.3%
-19.7% vs TC avg
§112
21.7%
-18.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 63 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . Response to Amendment The amendment filed 12/11/2024 has been entered. Any previous rejections not reiterated herein have been withdrawn. Claim Objections Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: The HAuCl4 should be HAUCl4 to be consistent with claim. Appropriate correction is required. 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 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-14 of U.S. Patent No. US 9789154 B1. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant claims are drawn to the same plasmonics-active gold nanostars, resulting from the same process as instantly claimed, see claim 1 of ‘154. While instant claim 1 contains some additional wherein clauses providing additional limitations to the nanostars not present in claim 1 of the patent, these additional limitations are present in dependent claims of the ‘154 patent. The size range and the plasmon peak in instant claim 1 is set forth in claim 5 of the ‘154 patent. The optical label of claim 1 and 12 is met by claim 6 of the patent. Nucleic acid of claim 1 and siRNA of claim 20 is met by claim 12 of the patent. Note, the near-infrared as recited in claim 1 is defined as 780-2500 nm via the broadest reasonable interpretation thereof and a range overlapping this range is recited in claim 5 of ‘154 of 600-1000nm. Note claims 2 and 3 have the same limitations as claims 2 and 3 of the patent. Concentrations of claim 5 are met by claim 4 of the patent. The various concentrations, etc. set forth in the dependent claims are found in the claims of the ‘154 patent. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to prepare the same gold nanostars as claimed from the disclosure set forth in the claims of the ‘154 patent given the claims of the patent significantly overlap with the instant claims by having the same components in various dependent claims and the same and/or overlapping ranges of concentrations, sizes, etc. as instantly claimed. Conclusion No claims are allowed at this time. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael G Hartley whose telephone number is (571)272-0616. The examiner can normally be reached 10-6:30. 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, Jennifer Michener can be reached at 5712721424. 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. /Michael G. Hartley/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1618
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 04, 2022
Application Filed
Aug 10, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §DP
Dec 11, 2024
Response Filed
Feb 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12589155
DESIGN AND EFFICIENT SYNTHESIS OF LIPID-FLUORESCEIN CONJUGATES FOR CAR-T CELL THERAPY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12565505
MTORC MODULATORS AND USES THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12540238
DISSOLVABLE SOLID STRUCTURE HAVING FIRST AND SECOND LAYERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12533308
WATER-DISPERSIBLE, OIL-FREE, AND UV-BLOCKING COSMETIC COMPOSITION AND PREPARATION METHOD THEREFOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12521376
GEL-CHEWABLE DOSAGE FORM
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 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

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
33%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+78.2%)
4y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 63 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