Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/786,161

COMPOUNDS MODULATING PROTEIN RECRUITMENT AND/OR DEGRADATION

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Jun 16, 2022
Examiner
YOUNGBLOOD, WILLIAM JUSTIN
Art Unit
1629
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Orionis Biosciences Inc.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
63%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 7m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 63% of resolved cases
63%
Career Allow Rate
32 granted / 51 resolved
+2.7% vs TC avg
Strong +40% interview lift
Without
With
+39.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
86
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.8%
-37.2% vs TC avg
§103
29.2%
-10.8% vs TC avg
§102
24.7%
-15.3% vs TC avg
§112
25.2%
-14.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 51 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §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 . Status of the Claims Claims 1, 4, 6, 8, 10, 15-17, 21, 23 and 26-35 are pending in the instant application and subject to examination herein. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a) The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 10 and 26-29 are 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. The claims contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The Invention in General Applicant has disclosed an invention in the field of compounds binding to cereblon, an E3 ubiquitin ligase active in the cellular ubiquitin-proteasome pathway (UPP) of protein degradation. The Claimed Invention Claim 10 is drawn to a compound or pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof, selected form a set of formulae, including Formula VII, a genus of compounds based on glutarimide (piperidine-2,6-dione) substituted at the glutarimide 3-position with a 1-oxo-2,3-dihydro-1H-isoindoline ring that is further substituted at its 4-7 positions (benzo ring), as shown in the image below: PNG media_image1.png 266 406 media_image1.png Greyscale . Importantly, claim 10 requires that for Formula VII at least two of R18-R21 must be substituted with -N(R5)-X-R6 substituents, with R5, X and R6 further defined for Formula VII in the claim. Claims 27-29 are drawn to methods of treatment of disease or modulating cereblon or cereblon-associated cellular processes that comprise administering a pharmaceutical composition comprising a compound of claim 10 and a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier. The Supporting Disclosure The instant Specification does not disclose a single compound that meets the limitations of Formula VII as claimed in instant claim 10. The instant specification does disclose multiple compounds having the same glutarimide/isoindoline scaffold as instant Formula VII and bearing a single substituent corresponding to the required formula -N(R5)-X-R6, for example Applicant’s compound C95330 (paragraph [0468]); however, no compounds bearing a second substituent corresponding to the required formula -N(R5)-X-R6 are disclosed, nor is any synthetic strategy for the synthesis of such compounds proposed, nor any reason why such compounds should be expected to serve in the methods claimed in claims 27-29. The State of the Art The level of skill and knowledge in the art: Cereblon-binding molecules, including those based on lenalidomide, the core scaffold of instant Formula VI, are well known in the art. Asatsuma-Okumura provides a review of the molecular mechanisms of cereblon-based drugs, including lenalidomide and its derivatives CC-885, iberdromide, and similar drugs based on thalidomide and pomalidomide (Asatsuma-Okumura, et al.; Pharmacology & Therapeutics, v202, pp.132-139; 2019): PNG media_image2.png 646 1108 media_image2.png Greyscale (Figure 1, page 133 of Asatsuma-Okumura). Asatsuma-Okumura notes that lenalidomide, which bears one amino group on the same core scaffold as instant Formula VII and is shown in the figure above, was approved by the FDA in 2006 (page 133). Thus, this mono-amino precursor was each known in the art for at least a decade prior to the filing date of the instant application; nevertheless, a review of the field of art finds no valid prior art exhibiting, proposing, or predicting a cereblon-binding molecule based on the core scaffold of instant Formula VII and having at least two amino groups bound to the benzo ring of the isoindoline moiety of the scaffold. The predictability of the art: Wang (Wang, Z., “Targeted Protein Degaradation Therapy: Molecular Glues Based on the Cereblon,” PhD Thesis: University of Groningen, The Netherlands, 2022) provides a review of “molecular glues”, which are cereblon-binding molecules (pages 21-54). Wang teaches that lenalidomide, pomalidomide and thalidomide are molecular glues that bind cereblon (page 24) and differentiates between cereblon-binding “molecular glues”, such as lenalidomide, and PROTAC molecules that promote targeted protein degradation by promoting association between cereblon and targeted proteins in the following criteria (Table 1, page 22): “molecular glues” bind only one protein (i.e., cereblon), have no linker, have poor amenability to rational design, low molecular weight, good cellular permeability, follow Lipinski rules and have good blood-brain barrier penetration; PROTACs bind two proteins, have a linker, are amenable to rational design, have high molecular weight, poor cellular permeability and blood-brain barrier penetration, and do not follow Lipinski rules. Crucially, Wang notes in the comparison above that cereblon-binding small molecules are poorly amenable to rational design. Wang also teaches that “the development of [molecular glues] is full of serendipity covered with mystery and strong uncertainty” (page 22). Claim 10 is indefinite because Applicant does not disclose any compounds that meet the limitations of instant formula VII, does not explain why such compounds are readily available by synthetic means and because the field of art does not provide any example of a compound that meets the limitations of Formula VII or otherwise propose or predict such a compound. Claims 26-29 are indefinite because they depend from and include all the limitations of claim 10 and do not resolve the indefiniteness of claim 10. Claims 27-29 are further indefinite because the instant disclosure does not disclose any rationale for why such compounds that have never before been prepared by Applicant or elsewhere should function as bioactive agents in the methods of treatment and cereblon/proteasome modulation claimed in claims 27-29, and because the field of art indicates that the design of small molecule cereblon-binding compounds is poorly predictable. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 – Withdrawn 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. The prior rejection of claims 1, 4, 6 and 8 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jin (CN 107739389 A)1 is withdrawn in response to Applicant’s amendment of claims 1, 4, 6 and 8. The prior rejection of claims 1, 2, 4, 6 and 8 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ruchelman (Ruchelman, et al.; Bioorganic & Medicinal Chemistry Letters, v23, pp.360-365; 2013)2 is withdrawn in response to Applicant’s amendment of claims 1, 4, 6 and 8 and cancellation of claim 2. The prior rejection of claims 1, 4, 6, 8, 16-17, 21 and 23 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Gray (U.S. Patent No. 11,530,219 B2) is withdrawn in response to Applicant’s amendment of claims 1, 4, 6 and 8. The prior rejection of claim 10 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Phillips_2020 (US PGPub 2020/0140456 A1) is withdrawn in response to Applicant’s amendment of claim 10. The prior rejection of claims 10 and 26-29 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Wang (WO 2021/041664 A1) is withdrawn in response to Applicant’s amendment of claim 10. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 – Withdrawn The prior rejection of claims 1-2 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the disclosure of Jin (CN 107739389 A)3 is withdrawn in response to Applicant’s amendment of claim 1 and cancellation of claim 2. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 – Necessitated by Amendments and/or New Claims 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 1 is anticipated by Crew. Claims 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Crew (U.S. Patent No. 10,584,101 B2)4. Claim 1 is drawn to a compound or pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof, selected form a set of formulae, including formula II, representing a genus of (1-oxo-2,3-dihydro-isoindolinyl)-piperazine-2,6-diones that are substituted at the 5-position of the isoindolinone ring, as shown in the table below. Crew discloses a hydrochloride salt of a compound5 that anticipates the limitations of formula II of claim 1, as shown in the table below (Col. 256, lines 30-42): Claim Number(s) of Instant Application Instant Application Crew 1 PNG media_image3.png 212 414 media_image3.png Greyscale wherein: PNG media_image4.png 144 302 media_image4.png Greyscale Thus, claim 1 is anticipated by the disclosure of Crew. Claims 1, 15-17 and 21 are anticipated by Chan. Claims 1, 15-17 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chan (US 2020/0369679 A1)6. Claim 1 is drawn to a compound or pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof, selected form a set of formulae, including formula IV, representing a genus of (1-oxo-2,3-dihydro-isoindolinyl)-piperazine-2,6-diones that are substituted at the 7-position of the isoindolinone ring, as shown in the table below. Chan discloses a compound7 that meets the limitations of Formula IV, as shown in the table below (paragraph [1301]): Claim Number(s) of Instant Application Instant Application Chan 1 PNG media_image5.png 218 358 media_image5.png Greyscale wherein: • R4 is cyano PNG media_image6.png 144 264 media_image6.png Greyscale Thus, claim 1 is anticipated by the disclosure of Chan. Claim 15 is drawn to a Markush group of specific compounds, including the compound “2-(2,6-dioxo-3-piperidyl)-3-oxo-isoindoline-4-carbonitrile”, disclosed by Chan and shown in the table above. Claim 33 further limits claim 15 to a narrower group of specific compounds that also includes “2-(2,6-dioxo-3-piperidyl)-3-oxo-isoindoline-4-carbonitrile”. Claim 16 is drawn to a pharmaceutical composition comprising a pharmaceutically effective amount of the compound of claim 1 and a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier. Chan discloses a pharmaceutical composition comprising a compound disclosed therein and a pharmaceutically acceptable excipient (paragraph [0123]). Claim 17 further limits claim 16 to a method of treating a cancer comprising administering the composition of claim 16 to a subject in need thereof, wherein the cancer to be treated is selected from a Markush group that includes breast cancer. Claim 21 further limits claim 16 to a method of treating an autoimmune disease or disorder, comprising administering the composition of claim 16 to a subject in need thereof, wherein the autoimmune disease or disorder is selected from a Markush group that includes Crohn’s disease. Chan discloses a method of treating, ameliorating, or preventing a disease, disorder, or condition associated with G1 to S phase transition protein (GSPT1) in a subject, comprising administering to the subject a therapeutically effective amount of a compound provided therein, or pharmaceutical composition comprising a compound disclosed therein, and further discloses that the disease, disorder or condition to be treated can be any of a Markush group of diseases/disorders/conditions that includes Crohn’s disease and breast cancer (paragraph [1238]). Thus, claims 15-17, 21 and 33 are anticipated by the disclosure of Chan. Claims 1, 4, 15 and 30 are anticipated by Liu. Claims 1 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Liu (WO 2020/038415 A1)8,9. The limitations of claim 1 are discussed in the rejections above and hereby incorporated into the instant rejection. Claim 4 further limits claim 1 to the following: The compound is a compound of Formula II R2 is -N(R5)-CH2)m-X-(CH2)n-R6; R5 is H R6 is selected from a Markush group that includes (C3-C10)heterocyclo. Liu discloses multiple compounds that anticipate the limitations of claim 4, for examples the compounds shown in the table below (Example 240, page 185, lines 1-9; and Example 257, page 206, lines 1-5): Claim Number(s) of Instant Application Instant Application Liu 1 PNG media_image3.png 212 414 media_image3.png Greyscale wherein: PNG media_image7.png 104 190 media_image7.png Greyscale 2-(2,6-dioxopiperidin-3-yl)-l-oxoisoindolin-5-yl)glycine (i.e., 2-[[2-(2,6-dioxo-3-piperidyl)-1-oxo-isoindolin-5-yl]amino]acetic acid) 1 PNG media_image3.png 212 414 media_image3.png Greyscale wherein: PNG media_image8.png 274 390 media_image8.png Greyscale 3-[1-oxo-5-(azetidin-3-ylamino)-2,3-dihydro-1H-isoindol-2-yl]piperidine-2,6-dione Thus, claims 1 and 4 are anticipated by the disclosure of Liu. Claim 15 claims a Markush group of specific compounds, including the compound “2-[[2-(2,6-dioxo-3-piperidyl)-1-oxo-isoindolin-5-yl]amino]acetic acid”, disclosed by Liu and shown in the table above. Claim 30 further limits claim 15 to a narrower Markush group of specific compounds that also includes the compound “2-[[2-(2,6-dioxo-3-piperidyl)-1-oxo-isoindolin-5-yl]amino]acetic acid”. Thus, claims 15 and 30 are anticipated by the disclosure of Liu. Claims 1 and 6 are anticipated by Tweedie. Claims 1 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tweedie (Tweedie, D., et al.; Journal of Neuroscience Methods, v183, pp182-187; 2009)10. Claim 1 is drawn to a compound or pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof, selected form a set of formulae, including formula III, representing a genus of (1-oxo-2,3-dihydro-isoindolinyl)-piperazine-2,6-diones that are substituted at the 6-position of the isoindolinone ring, as shown in the table below. Tweedie teaches a study in the development of a cellular assay used to develop tumor necrosis alpha (TNF-a) lowering agents, and Tweedie teaches a compound, called “A9”,11 that anticipates the limitations of Formula III of claim 1, as shown in the table below (page 184, Figure 2): Claim Number(s) of Instant Application Instant Application Tweedie 1 PNG media_image9.png 212 414 media_image9.png Greyscale wherein: PNG media_image10.png 96 228 media_image10.png Greyscale Thus, claim 1 is anticipated by the teaching of Tweedie. Claim 6 further limits formula (III) of claim 1 to a narrower genus that is also met by compound A9 of Tweedie. Thus, claim 6 is anticipated by the teaching of Tweedie. Claims 1, 8, 16-17 and 23 are anticipated by Duplessis. Claims 1, 8, 16-17 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Duplessis (WO 2021/083949 A1)12. The limitations of claim 1 are discussed in the rejections above and hereby incorporated into the instant rejection. Duplessis discloses bifunctional compounds that cause the degradation of a subunit protein of the Switch/Sucrose Non Fermentable (SWI/SNF) complex, namely SWI/SNF-Related Actin-Dependent Regulator of Chromatin, Subfamily A, Member 2 (SMARCA2). As part of the invention, Duplessis discloses a compound, designated as “Example 111”13, that anticipates the limitations of instant Formula IV of claim 1, as shown in the table below (page 224, lines 11-15): Claim Number(s) of Instant Application Instant Application Duplessis 1 PNG media_image5.png 218 358 media_image5.png Greyscale wherein: PNG media_image11.png 148 342 media_image11.png Greyscale Thus, claim 1 is anticipated by the disclosure of Duplessis. Claim 8 further limits Formula IV of claim 1 to a narrower genus that is met by Duplessis’ “Example 111”. Claim 16 further limits claim 1 to a composition comprising a pharmaceutically effective amount of the compound of claim 1 and a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier. Duplessis further discloses that the invention disclosed therein includes pharmaceutical compositions comprising a compound disclosed therein or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof, and therapeutically inert carrier (page 3, lines 17-19). Claim 17 further limits claim 16 to a method of treating a cancer comprising administering the composition of claim 16 to a subject in need thereof, wherein the cancer to be treated is selected from a Markush group that includes breast cancer. Duplessis discloses a method of treating SMARCA2-mediated disorders in a subject, comprising administering a compound disclosed therein or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof, to the subject (page 42, lines 16-19) and further discloses that SMARCA2-mediated disorders include cancers, including breast cancers (pages 42-43, bridging paragraph). Claim 23 further limits claim 16 to a Markush group of methods that includes a method of modulating proteasomal degradation of a protein, comprising administering the composition of claim 16 to a subject in need thereof. Duplessis discloses that the compounds disclosed therein cause the degradation of SMARCA2 protein via the targeted ubiquination of SMARCA2 protein and subsequent proteasomal degradation. Thus, claims 8, 16-17 and 23 are anticipated by the disclosure of Duplessis. Claim 10 is anticipated by CAS 16477-31-9. Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CAS 16477-31-9 (Chemical Abstracts Services, registry number 16477-31-9, originally entered on 11/16/1984). Claim 10 is drawn to a compound or pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof, selected form a set of formulae, including Formula VIII that regards a genus of compounds based on glutarimide (2,6-piperidinedione) substituted at the glutarimidyl 3-position with 3-oxo-1,2-benzisothiazole-S,S-dioxide that may be optionally further substituted at the 4-7 positions of the benzisothiazole ring, as shown in the table below. CAS 16477-31-9 discloses a compound14 that is the simplest iteration of the genus of instant Formula VIII, while meeting the limitations of the genus, as shown in the table below: Claim Number(s) of Instant Application Instant Application CAS 16477-31-9 10 PNG media_image12.png 270 420 media_image12.png Greyscale wherein: • R8-R11 are all hydrogen PNG media_image13.png 200 400 media_image13.png Greyscale Thus, claim 10 is anticipated by CAS 16477-31-9. Claims 10, 15, 26-29 and 33 are anticipated by Phillips_2017. Claims 10, 15, 26-29 and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Phillips_2017 (WO 2017/197051 A1)15. Claim 10 is drawn to a compound or pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof, selected form a set of formulae, including Formula X that regards a genus of 3-substituted glutarimides (2,6-piperidine-diones). Phillips_2017 discloses an invention of amine-linked C3-glutarimide degronimers and degrons for therapeutic applications (Abstract), including various compound that anticipate the instant Formula X, for example Phillips’ compounds 216 and 17417, as shown in the table below (page 251, lines 5-11): Claim Number(s) of Instant Application Instant Application Phillips_2017 10 PNG media_image14.png 216 212 media_image14.png Greyscale wherein: PNG media_image15.png 110 184 media_image15.png Greyscale 10 PNG media_image14.png 216 212 media_image14.png Greyscale wherein: PNG media_image16.png 152 176 media_image16.png Greyscale Thus, claim 10 is anticipated by the disclosure of Phillips_2017. Claim 15 is drawn to a Markush group of specific compounds that includes the compound “3-(2-oxopyrrolidin-1-yl)piperidine-2,6-dione”. Claim 33 further limits claim 15 to a narrower group of specific compounds that also includes “3-(2-oxopyrrolidin-1-yl)piperidine-2,6-dione”. Phillips_2017 discloses this compound as “compound 174”, as shown in the table above. Claim 26 further limits claim 10 to a composition comprising a pharmaceutically effective amount of a compound of claim 10 and a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier. Phillips_2017 provides pharmaceutical compositions comprising an effective amount of compound or pharmaceutically acceptable salt together with at least one pharmaceutically acceptable carrier for any of the uses described therein (page 230, lines 14-23). Claim 27 further limits claim 10 to a method of treating a cancer comprising administering the composition of claim 26 to a subject in need thereof, wherein the cancer is selected from a Markush group that includes breast cancer. Claim 28 further limits claim 10 to a method of treating an autoimmune disease comprising administering the composition of claim 26 to a subject in need thereof, wherein the autoimmune disease is selected from a Markush group that includes multiple sclerosis. Phillips_2017 discloses methods of treatment of diseases, including that the compounds of Phillips’ Formula I can be used to treat diseases or disorders, by administering the compound in an effective amount to a host, including a human (page 204, lines 17-25). Phillips_2017 further discloses that compounds of Phillips_2017’s Formula I can be used to treat a Markush group of diseases including multiple sclerosis (pages 204-205, bridging paragraph), and further discloses that compounds of the invention disclosed therein can be used to treat cancer, including breast cancer (page 211, lines 9-31). Phillips_2017’s compound 2 meets the limitations of Phillips_2017’s compound Formula I (page 86, lines 14-18 and page 89, top left exemplary compound). Claim 29 further limits claim 26 to a Markush group of methods that includes a method of modulating cereblon, comprising administering the composition of claim 26 to a subject in need thereof. Phillips_2017 discloses that the compounds disclosed therein can be used alone as an in vivo binder of cereblon which can be administered to a host, for example, a human, in need thereof, in an effective amount, optionally as a pharmaceutically acceptable salt, and optionally in a pharmaceutically acceptable composition, for any therapeutic indication which can be treated by modulating the function and or activity of the cereblon-containing E3 Ubiquitin Ligase Protein Complex (pages 15-16, bridging paragraph). Thus, claims 15, 26-29 and 33 are anticipated by the disclosure of Phillips_2017. Claims 10, 15, 26-27, 29 and 35 are anticipated by Hwang. Claims 10, 15, 26-27, 29 and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hwang (US PG Pub 2022/0105188 A1). The limitations of claims 10, 15, 26-27 and 29 are discussed in the rejections above and hereby incorporated into the instant rejection. Claim 10 is drawn to a compound or pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof, selected form a set of formulae, including Formula IX that regards a genus of compounds based on glutarimide (piperidine-2,6-dione) substituted at the glutarimide 3-position with a 4-oxo-3,4-dihydro-1,2,3-benzotriazine ring that may be optionally further substituted at its 5-8 positions (benzo ring), as shown in the table below. Hwang discloses multiple compounds that meet the limitations of Formula IX of instant claim 10, for example Hwang’s “Example 67”18 shown in the table below (paragraph [1080]): Claim Number(s) of Instant Application Instant Application Hwang 10 PNG media_image17.png 248 418 media_image17.png Greyscale wherein: PNG media_image18.png 248 544 media_image18.png Greyscale Thus, claim 10 is anticipated by the disclosure of Hwang. Claim 15 is drawn to a Markush group of specific compounds including “3-(8-amino-4-oxo-1,2,3-benzotriazin-3-yl)piperidine-2,6-dione”. Claim 35 further limits claim 15 to a narrower group of specific compounds that still includes “3-(8-amino-4-oxo-1,2,3-benzotriazin-3-yl)piperidine-2,6-dione”. Hwang discloses this compound by name (paragraph [0126]). Regarding claim 26, Hwang discloses a pharmaceutical composition comprising a compound of the invention disclosed therein in combination with a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier, excipient or diluent and optionally other biologically active agents (paragraph [0510]). Regarding claim 27, Hwang discloses that the invention disclosed therein comprises administering to a patient or subject at least one effective amount of a compound as described hereinabove, optionally in combination with an additional biologically active agent, thereby degrading a bromo domain-containing protein or polypeptide capable of controlling a disease state or condition, which treats the disease state or condition. The method according to the invention can be used to treat various disease states or symptoms, including cancer, by administration of at least one effective amount of a compound described therein (paragraph [0511]). Claim 29 further limits claim 26 to a Markush group of methods including a method of modulating proteasomal degradation of a protein. Hwang discloses that the invention therein is “Degraducer compound that induces degradation of a target protein, i.e., EED or PRC2, utilizing cereblon E3 ubiquitin ligase” (Abstract), and that compounds disclosed therein have an aspect of remarkably achieving target proteolysis-inducing activity through UPS (Ubiquitin Proteasome System) (paragraph [0041]). Thus, claims 15, 26-27, 29 and 35 are anticipated by the disclosure of Hwang. Claims 15 and 33 are anticipated by Phillips_2020. Claims 15 and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Phillips_2020 (US PGPub 2020/0140456 A1) Claim 15 is drawn to a Markush group of specific compounds that includes the following compounds: 3-(quinoxalin-2-ylamino)piperidine-2,6-dione; 3-(quinazolin-2-ylamino)piperidine-2,6-dione. Claim 33 further limits claim 15 to a narrower group of specific compounds that still includes both of the compounds listed above. Both of these compounds are disclosed by Phillips among a non-limiting set of examples of compounds available via Phillips_2020’s synthetic scheme 37 (paragraph [0949], pages 196-197): PNG media_image19.png 114 198 media_image19.png Greyscale (3-(quinoxalin-2-ylamino)piperidine-2,6-dione, paragraph [0949], page 196, bottom right) PNG media_image20.png 104 199 media_image20.png Greyscale (3-(quinazolin-2-ylamino)piperidine-2,6-dione, paragraph [0949], page 197, top left) The compound “3-(quinazolin-2-ylamino)piperidine-2,6-dione” is further disclosed by Phillips_2020 as “Compound 120” (page 187, paragraph [0916]): PNG media_image21.png 128 412 media_image21.png Greyscale . Thus, claims 15 and 33 are anticipated by the disclosure of Phillips_2020. Claims 15 and 33 are anticipated by CAS 1495439-14-9. Claims 15 and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CAS 1495439-14-9 (Chemical Abstracts Services, registry number CAS 1495439-14-9, originally entered on 12/15/2013 by Aurora Fine Chemicals). The limitations of claims 15 and 33 are discussed in the rejections above and hereby incorporated into the instant rejection. CAS 1495469-14-9 discloses the compound “3-(2-pyrimidinylamino)-2,6-piperidinedione”, which is claimed in claims 15 and 33: PNG media_image22.png 98 178 media_image22.png Greyscale Thus, claims 15 and 33 are anticipated by the disclosure of CAS 1495439-14-9. Claims 15 and 33 are anticipated by CAS 1910778-49-2. Claims 15 and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CAS 1910778-49-2 (Chemical Abstracts Services, registry number 1910778-49-2, originally entered on 05/15/2016 by Aurora Fine Chemicals). The limitations of claims 15 and 33 are discussed in the rejections above and hereby incorporated into the instant rejection. CAS 1910778-49-2 discloses the compound “N-(2,6-dioxo-3-piperidinyl)-1,6-dihydro-6-oxo-2-pyridinecarboxamide”, which is claimed in claims 15 and 33: PNG media_image23.png 96 200 media_image23.png Greyscale Thus, claims 15 and 33 are anticipated by the disclosure of CAS 1910778-49-2. Claims 15 and 35 are anticipated by CAS 2250288-86-7. Claims 15 and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CAS 2250288-86-7 (Chemical Abstracts Services, registry number 2250288-86-7, originally entered on 11/30/2018). The limitations of claims 15 and 35 are discussed in the rejections above and hereby incorporated into the instant rejection. CAS 2250288-86-7 discloses the compound “3-(4-oxo-1,2.3-benzotriazin-3(4H)-yl)-2,6-piperidinedione”, which is claimed in claims 15 and 35: PNG media_image24.png 114 208 media_image24.png Greyscale Thus, claims 15 and 35 are anticipated by the disclosure of CAS 2250288-86-7. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 32 and 34 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to W. JUSTIN YOUNGBLOOD whose telephone number is (703)756-5979. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday from 8am to 5pm. The examiner can also be reached on alternate Fridays. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jeffrey S. Lundgren, can be reached at telephone number (571) 272-5541. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice. /W.J.Y./Examiner, Art Unit 1629 /JEFFREY S LUNDGREN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1629 1 Cited in Applicant’s Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) dated 06/16/2022. 2 Cited in Applicant’s Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) dated 04/22/2024. 3 Cited in Applicant’s Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) dated 06/16/2022. 4 Filing date: 10/11/2017 5 3-[1-oxo-5-(piperazin-1-yl)-2,3-dihydro-1H-isoindol-2-yl]piperidine-2,6-dione hydrochloride 6 Effective filing date: 05/24/2019. 7 2-(2,6-dioxopiperidin-3-yl)-3-oxoisoindoline-4-carbonitrile, also nameable as 3-[1-oxo-7-cyano-2,3-dihydro-1H-isoindol-2-yl]piperidine-2,6-dione 8 Filing date: 09/21/2019 9 Cited in Applicant’s Information Disclosure Statement dated 03/07/2025. 10 Cited in Applicant’s Information Disclosure Statement dated 05/30/2024. 11 3-[1-oxo-6-(isopropylamino)-2,3-dihydro-1H-isoindol-2-yl]piperidine-2,6-dione 12 Effective filing date: 10/29/2019 13 3-[7-[[1-[9-[4-[4-[3-[3-amino-6-(2-hydroxyphenyl)pyridazin-4-yl]oxy-1-piperidyl]phenyl]piperazin-1-yl]-9-oxo-nonyl]triazol-4-yl]methylamino]-1-oxoisoindolin-2-yl]piperidine-2,6-dione 14 3-(1,1-Dioxido-3-oxo-1,2-benzisothiazole-2(3H)-yl)-2,6-piperidinedione 15 Cited in Applicant’s Information Disclosure Statement dated 10/18/2023. 16 N-(2,6-dioxopiperidin-3-yl)benzamide 17 3-(2-oxopyrrolidin-1-yl)piperidine-2,6-dione 18 3-(6-((2-(4-((4-(4-((3S,4R)-4-(dimethylamino)-l-(2-fluoro-6-methylbenzyl)pyrrolidin-3-yl)phenyl)piperazin-l-yl)methyl)piperidin-1-yl)-2-oxoethyl)amino)-4-oxobenzo[d][1,2,3]triazin-3(4H)-yl)piperidin-2,6-dione
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 16, 2022
Application Filed
Apr 16, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Aug 27, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 07, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Jan 21, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 27, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 13, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600734
PHOTOSENSITIZING DYE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594277
MACROCYCLIC ULK1/2 INHIBITORS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583848
ISOXAZOLE-3-CARBOXAMIDE DERIVATIVES AND THEIR USE FOR TREATMENT OF DISEASES CAUSED BY VIRUS INFECTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583834
METHOD OF TREATING BACTERIAL INFECTIONS AND PHARMACEUTICAL COMPOSITION FOR TREATING BACTERIAL INFECTIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12569493
Treatment of Chemosensory Dysfunction from a Coronavirus Infection
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
63%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+39.6%)
3y 7m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 51 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