Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/828,609

Mitochondria-Targeted Polypeptide, Preparation Method thereof, and Use thereof

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
May 31, 2022
Examiner
COFFA, SERGIO
Art Unit
1658
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Sun Yat-sen University
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
61%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 61% of resolved cases
61%
Career Allow Rate
436 granted / 719 resolved
+0.6% vs TC avg
Strong +34% interview lift
Without
With
+33.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
61 currently pending
Career history
780
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.5%
-36.5% vs TC avg
§103
32.1%
-7.9% vs TC avg
§102
20.5%
-19.5% vs TC avg
§112
27.0%
-13.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 719 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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 . DETAILED ACTION Election/Restrictions Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, wherein R1 is biotin and R2 is doxorubicin in the reply filed on 10/23/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the withdrawn claims 6 and 11 are method claims directed to mitochondrial-targeting peptides, which are both directly and indirectly dependent from the elected claim 1. This is not found persuasive because when the claimed process can be used to make a materially different product, as in the instant case, a restriction between the two groups is proper (see MPEP 806.05(f)). The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Claims 6 and 11 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 10/23/2025. Status of the Claims Claims 1-7 and 9-21 are pending in this application. Claims 6 and 11 are withdrawn from consideration as being drawn to a non-elected invention. Claims 1-5, 7, 9-10 and 12-21 are presently under consideration as being drawn to the elected species/invention. Claim Objections Claims 1-5, 7, 9-10 and 12-21 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 should be rewritten to recite “A mitochondria-targeted polypeptide (MTP)of Formula I…”. Claims 2-5, 7 and 9-10 should be rewritten to recite “…..MTP according to claim 1…..”. Claims 12-14 should be rewritten to recite “The drug carrier according….”. Claims 15-17 should be rewritten to recite “The cell-membrane-penetrating peptide according….”. Claims 18-21 should be rewritten to recite “The pharmaceutical composition according….”. 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 1-5, 7, 9-10 and 12-21 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. With respect to claim 1, the phrase “drug groups” is not defined in the instant specification. One of ordinary skill in the art would not know what is encompassed by said phrase. Furthermore, claim 1 recites the phrase “at least one selected from the group”, which implies that R2 can also be something else. However, the specification does not teach what is encompassed by said R2. Similarly, claims 2-5, 12-17 and 19 -21 recite the phrase “at least one selected from the group”. With respect to claims 4-5, 14, 17 and 21, the word “derivatives” is not defined in the instant specification. One of ordinary skill in the art would not know what is encompassed by said word. A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claims 5, 14, 17 and 21 recite the broad recitation “comprises a drug”, and the claims also recite “preferably, the drug is at least..” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. Similarly, claim 11 recites the broad recitation “wherein the amino protecting group is at least one selected…”, and the claim also recites “preferably, the tumor-targeting ligand is at least..” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims. Claims 2-5, 7, 9-10 and 12-21, which depend from claim 1, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as these claims incorporate by dependency the indefiniteness of claim 1. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. Claims 1-2, 4-5, 7, 9-10, 12, 14-15, 17-19 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Xiao et al. (Chem. Eur. J. 2021, 27, 12207-12214). With respect to claims 1-2, 5, 7, 12 and 14, Xiao et al. teach the following mitochondria-targeted polypeptide (MTP) (Fig. 5A), which corresponds to the instantly claimed MTP wherein R1 is acyl and R2 is doxorubicin (Dox). PNG media_image1.png 379 975 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 97 491 media_image2.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 97 491 media_image2.png Greyscale Xiao et al. also teach that Xiao et al. also teach that Dox emits fluorescence signals (page 12212, right column, 1st para). Therefore, Dox can be considered both a fluorescent group and a drug group. With respect to claim 4, as discussed above under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), the word “derivatives” is not defined in the instant specification. Therefore, Doc can be considered a derivative of any of the fluorescent group claimed. With respect to claim 9, Xiao et al. teach that “[U]pon effective cell uptake and endosome escape, we found the cytosolically released native cargo was predominantly localized inside the mitochondria” (page 12208, right column, 2nd para), thus implying that MTP is a cell-membrane-penetrating peptide. With respect to claim 10, Xiao et al. teach that “[O]ur strategy thus paves the way for future mitochondrion-targeted therapy with a variety of biologically active agents (abstract). One of ordinary skill in the art would have at once envisaged a pharmaceutical composition comprising the MTP for administration. With respect to claims 17 and 19, Xiao et al. teach that R1 is acyl and R2 is doxorubicin (Dox) (Fig. 5A). With respect to claim 18, as discussed above, Xiao et al. teach that MTP is a cell-membrane-penetrating peptide targeting mitochondria (page 12208, right column, 2nd para). With respect to claim 21, as discussed above, Xiao et al. teach that the drug is Dox (Fig. 5A). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SERGIO COFFA whose telephone number is (571)270-3022. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 6AM-4PM. 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, MELISSA FISHER can be reached at 571-270-7430. 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. /SERGIO COFFA Ph.D./ Primary Examiner Art Unit 1658 /SERGIO COFFA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1658
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 31, 2022
Application Filed
Dec 16, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595283
POLYPEPTIDE TAG AND APPLICATION THEREOF IN IN VITRO PROTEIN SYNTHESIS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590119
PEPTIDE SYNTHESIS AND SYSTEM THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582924
METHODS FOR OBTAINING LIQUID FROM A SOLID PHASE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12569574
PROTEINS WITH CARDIOPROTECTIVE ACTIVITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12569435
Ocular Compositions and Methods Thereof
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
61%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+33.6%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 719 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