Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/789,185

COMPOSITIONS FOR USE IN THE INHIBITION OF DIHYDROOROTATE DEHYDROGENASE

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Jun 25, 2022
Examiner
ANDERSON, REBECCA L
Art Unit
1626
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Hendrix College
OA Round
2 (Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allow Rate
749 granted / 1022 resolved
+13.3% vs TC avg
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+24.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
1066
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
17.0%
-23.0% vs TC avg
§102
25.0%
-15.0% vs TC avg
§112
31.8%
-8.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1022 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION Claims 1-3, 6, 9, 12, 13, 19, 21, 23, 27, 29, 33, 35, 39, 42, 49, and 51 are currently pending in the instant application. Claims 1-3, 6, 13, 19, 33, 35, and 42 are allowed. Claims 9, 12, 21, 23, 27, and 29 are rejected. Claim 39 is objected. Claims 49 and 51 are withdrawn. 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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant's election with traverse of Group I and the species: PNG media_image1.png 200 272 media_image1.png Greyscale in the reply filed on 30 June 2025 has been previously acknowledged. According to MPEP 803.02, the examiner has determined whether the elected species is allowable. Applicants’ elected species appears allowable. Therefore, the search and examination has been extended to the entirety of claims 1-3, 6, 13, 19, 33, 35, and 42 which are also allowable. Response to Amendment and Arguments Applicant's amendment and arguments filed 30 December 2025 have been fully considered and entered into the instant application. While applicant has amended claim 39 to overcome the objection, the objection to claim 39 is amended as discussed below, for example as an “s” is deleted, however, there was no “s” present to be deleted. Applicant’s amendment to variables R5a, R5b, R5c, R5d, and R5e, Z1, and R20 have overcome the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejections as being anticipated by Registry No. 896639-02-4, by Registry No. 1157857-82-3, and by Horak. Applicant’s amendment has also overcome the 35 USC 103 rejection as being unpatentable over Horak. Claim Objections Claim 39 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 39 has “[[s]]” in the first line of the claim, which is used to indicate the deletion of “s”, however, there was no “s” to delete. Additionally, the amendment filed 6/30/2025, while marking claim 39 as “original” had markings to show deletions and additions, which are also present in the claim 39 amended 12/30/2025, it is suggested that claim 39 be canceled and rewritten as a new claim in order to prevent printer errors. Appropriate correction is required. 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 21, 23, 27 and 29 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. Specifically, claims 21, 23, 27 and 29, which are ultimately dependent upon claim 1, have variables that are not defined in claims 21, 23, 27 or 29 and are also not defined in claim 1. For example, variable R30, A1, R40, A2, R31, A3, and R41 are variables provided without any definitions. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d): (d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph: Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. Claims 9, 12, 21, 23, 27 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Specifically, claims 9, 12, 21, 23, 27 and 29 have definitions for variables R5a, R5b, R5c, R5d, and R5e which are not found in parent claim 1. For example, claim 9 has halogen, C1-C7haloalkyl, or -O(C1-C7 haloalkyl), which are not possible definitions in ultimate parent claim 1 which defines R5c as: Wherein one of R5b and R5c is R20 PNG media_image2.png 68 670 media_image2.png Greyscale PNG media_image3.png 66 676 media_image3.png Greyscale .Claim 12, for example, has R5c as -OCF3 which is not found in ultimate parent claim 1. Claim 21 has R5a, for example, as PNG media_image4.png 66 680 media_image4.png Greyscale which is not found in parent claim 1. Claim 21 also has PNG media_image5.png 66 704 media_image5.png Greyscale which includes definitions outside the scope of parent claim 1, such as halogen. Claim 27 defines R5b similarly to claim 21. Claims 23 and 29 dependent upon claims 21 and 27 respectively do not fix the deficiencies of their parent claims and are also rejected. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to REBECCA L ANDERSON whose telephone number is (571)272-0696. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday from 6am-2pm. 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, Andrew Kosar can be reached at 571-272-0913. 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. /REBECCA L ANDERSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1626 ____________________ 3 April 2026 Rebecca Anderson Primary Examiner Art Unit 1626, Group 1620 Technology Center 1600
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 25, 2022
Application Filed
Jul 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Dec 30, 2025
Response Filed
Apr 03, 2026
Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12582645
Chemokine CXCR4 Receptor Modulators and Uses Related Thereto
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12570666
FUROINDAZOLE DERIVATIVES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12565504
SPIROCYCLIC O-GLYCOPROTEIN-2-ACETAMIDO-2-DEOXY-3-D-GLUCOPYRANOSIDASE INHIBITORS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12545649
WDR5-MYC INHIBITORS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12540141
NOVEL SPIROPYRROLIDINE DERIVED ANTIVIRAL AGENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 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
73%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+24.0%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1022 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