Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/772,701

KERATIN BD-3, PREPARATION METHOD THEREFOR AND PHARMACEUTICAL COMPOSITION AND USE THEREOF

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Apr 28, 2022
Examiner
BOWLES, DAVID PAUL
Art Unit
1654
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Institute of Materia Medica, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
2-3
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
22 granted / 26 resolved
+24.6% vs TC avg
Strong +22% interview lift
Without
With
+22.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
46 currently pending
Career history
72
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.6%
-37.4% vs TC avg
§103
29.8%
-10.2% vs TC avg
§102
15.9%
-24.1% vs TC avg
§112
38.4%
-1.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 26 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement No information disclosure statement has been filed. Claim Status Claims 15-24, filed 10/25/2025, are currently pending. Claim 15-24 are under examination. Claims 1-14 are canceled. Previous Objections Specification The specification was previously objected to for the usage of trade names and marks used in commerce. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant Reply, page 8, para. 3, filed 10/15/2025, with respect to this objection have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection to the specification has been withdrawn. Claim Objections The claims previously were objected to as not being compliant with 37 CFR 1.121(c) because they did not show markups relative to the immediate prior claim listing. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant Reply, page 9, para. 6, filed 10/15/2025, with respect to claim markups have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection to the claims has been withdrawn. Claim 15 was previously objected to under MPEP 2173.05(s) for dependent upon claims that have been withdrawn from consideration. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant Reply, page 10, para. 3, filed 10/15/2025, with respect to multiple dependent claims have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection to the claims has been withdrawn. Previous Rejections Claim 15 was previously rejected 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. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant Reply, page 11, para. 2, filed 10/15/2025, with respect to this rejection have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claim 15 has been withdrawn. Claim 15 was previously rejected 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. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant Reply, page 13, para. 4, filed 10/15/2025, with respect to this rejection have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claim 15 has been withdrawn. New Rejections Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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 15-24 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. Regarding claims 15 and 18-22, these claims recite the phrase “…in the sequence listing”. It is not clear to which sequence listing this claim refers. MPEP 2173.05(s) states: “Where possible, claims are to be complete in themselves. Incorporation by reference to a specific figure or table "is permitted only in exceptional circumstances where there is no practical way to define the invention in words and where it is more concise to incorporate by reference than duplicating a drawing or table into the claim. Incorporation by reference is a necessity doctrine, not for applicant’s convenience." Ex parte Fressola, 27 USPQ2d 1608, 1609 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1993).” Clarification is required. Removal of this phrase will resolve this rejection. Regarding claims 16-17 and 23-24, these claims are dependent upon claims rejected above. These claims do not resolve the indefiniteness of the claims from which they depend, and therefore are rejected. Claims 16, 17, 23, and 24 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. Regarding claims 16, 17, and 23, the phrase “including” is equivalent to "such as", which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Clarification is required. Substitution of “including” with “consisting of” will resolve this rejection. Regarding claim 24, claim 24 depends off of claim 23 and fails to resolve the indefiniteness of claim 23 and therefore claim 24 is rejected. Closest Prior Art SEQ ID NO: 1 is known in the prior art. Applicant SEQ ID NO: 1 is aligned against UNIPROT Accession No: A3KN26, submitted 3 April 2007, accessed 1/12/2026: SQ SEQUENCE 384 AA; 43269 MW; C8010CF759119947 CRC64; Query Match 100.0%; Score 1991; Length 384; Best Local Similarity 100.0%; Matches 384; Conservative 0; Mismatches 0; Indels 0; Gaps 0; Qy 1 MSYSCCLPNLSFRSSCSSRPCVPSSCCGTTLPGACNIPANVGSCNWFCEGSFNGSEKETM 60 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Db 1 MSYSCCLPNLSFRSSCSSRPCVPSSCCGTTLPGACNIPANVGSCNWFCEGSFNGSEKETM 60 Qy 61 QFLNDRLASYLEKVRQLERDNAELESRILERSQQKILANKAENARLVVQIDNAKLAADDF 120 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Db 61 QFLNDRLASYLEKVRQLERDNAELESRILERSQQKILANKAENARLVVQIDNAKLAADDF 120 Qy 121 RTKYQTELGLRQLVESDINGLRRILDELTLCKSDLEAQVESLKEELICLKQNHEQEVNTL 180 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Db 121 RTKYQTELGLRQLVESDINGLRRILDELTLCKSDLEAQVESLKEELICLKQNHEQEVNTL 180 Qy 181 RSQLGDRLNVEVDAAPTVDLNRVLNETRAQYEALVETNRRDVEEWYIRQTEELNKQVVSS 240 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Db 181 RSQLGDRLNVEVDAAPTVDLNRVLNETRAQYEALVETNRRDVEEWYIRQTEELNKQVVSS 240 Qy 241 SEQLQSYQAEIIELRRTVNALEVELQAQHNLRDSLENTLTETEARYSCQLAQVQGLIGNV 300 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Db 241 SEQLQSYQAEIIELRRTVNALEVELQAQHNLRDSLENTLTETEARYSCQLAQVQGLIGNV 300 Qy 301 ESQLAEIRSDLERQNQEYQVLLDVRARLECEINTYRGLLDSEDCKLPCNPCATTNASSVG 360 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Db 301 ESQLAEIRSDLERQNQEYQVLLDVRARLECEINTYRGLLDSEDCKLPCNPCATTNASSVG 360 Qy 361 SCVTNPCTPCGPRSRFGPCNTFGC 384 |||||||||||||||||||||||| Db 361 SCVTNPCTPCGPRSRFGPCNTFGC 384 However, no prior art discloses, teaches, or suggests usage of this polypeptide in the disclosed method. This same logic extends to the nucleic acid encoding this polypeptide. Regarding claim 16, upon a review of the art, such as Mahajan et al. (Mahajan, et al. Indian J Pharm Educ Res 48.3: 34-47 (2014)), which discusses many of the modifications in claim 16, claims 15-24 are supported and enabled by the specification and said art. Conclusion No claim is allowed. Claims 15-24 are rejected. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to David Paul Bowles whose telephone number is (571)272-0919. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-5:00. 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, Lianko Garyu can be reached on (571) 270-7367. 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. /DAVID PAUL BOWLES/ Examiner, Art Unit 1654 /LIANKO G GARYU/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1654
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 28, 2022
Application Filed
Jul 11, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Oct 15, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Mar 31, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 31, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594326
COMPOSITIONS OF GLP-1 PEPTIDES AND PREPARATION THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590134
GLP-1 AGONIST POLYPEPTIDE COMPOUND AND SALT THEREOF, SYNTHESIS METHOD THEREFOR AND USE THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12576025
PHARMACEUTICAL PARENTERAL COMPOSITION OF DUAL GLP1/2 AGONIST
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577259
PCSK9 ANTAGONIST COMPOUNDS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12576162
CELL PENETRATING PEPTIDES AND USES THEREOF
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

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
85%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+22.2%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 26 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