Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 17/998,367

BIOLOGICAL MACROMOLECULAR TARGET-SPECIFIC COMPLEMENT INHIBITOR, PREPARATION METHOD THEREFOR, AND APPLICATION THEREOF

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Nov 10, 2022
Examiner
OUSPENSKI, ILIA I
Art Unit
1644
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Shanghai Comgen Biopharmaceutical Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
850 granted / 1097 resolved
+17.5% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+20.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
42 currently pending
Career history
1139
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.7%
-38.3% vs TC avg
§103
10.6%
-29.4% vs TC avg
§102
19.1%
-20.9% vs TC avg
§112
17.3%
-22.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1097 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
DETAILED ACTION 1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . 2. Applicant's election with traverse of the invention of Group I and the Species of factor H in the reply filed on 12/26/2025 is acknowledged. This is unpersuasive, because search burden is not a consideration in national stage applications submitted under 35 USC 371, which are evaluated for unity of invention under 37 CFR 1.499 and 37 CFR 1.475. The restriction requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Claims 39-40 are withdrawn from further consideration by the Examiner under 37 C.F.R. § 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected inventions. Claims 1-4, 7, 10-12, 14, 16-17, 21-24, 27, 31, 33-34 and 38 are presently under consideration. 3. 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. 4. Claims 1-4, 7, 10-12, 14, 16-17, 21-24, 27, 31, 33-34 and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. (i) Claims 1, 17 and 24 are indefinite as being in improper Markush format. The Office recommends the use of the phrase "selected from the group consisting of ..." with the use of the conjunction "and" rather than "or" in listing the species. See MPEP 803.02. (ii) Claims 1 and 17 are further indefinite in the recitation of “factor H (FH), CD55, CD46, CD59, and CR1, or a functional fragment thereof,” because it is unclear whether the claim is limited to functional fragments of CR1, or encompasses functional fragments of all listed proteins. Likewise, claim 1 is indefinite in the recitation of “an IgG Fc domain and a human serum albumin, or a functional fragment thereof,” because it is unclear whether the claim is limited to functional fragments of human serum albumin, or also encompasses functional fragments of an IgG Fc domain. Similarly, claim 24 is indefinite in the recitation of “CD59 and CD55, or a functional fragment thereof,” because it is unclear whether the claim is limited to functional fragments of CD55, or also encompasses functional fragments of CD59. (iii) Claims 1, 17 and 24 are further indefinite in the recitation of “functional” fragments of the respective proteins, because it is unknown which function(s) are encompassed by the claims. (iv) Claim 16, and claims 17, 21-24, 27, 31, 33-34 and 38 dependent thereon, are indefinite as being dependent on canceled claims. Accordingly, claims 16-17, 21-24, 27, 31, 33-34 and 38 are not been further examined on the merits. (v) Claims 2-4, 7, 10-12, 14, 16-17, 21-24, 27, 31, 33-34 and 38 are indefinite, because they encompass the indefinite limitations of the claim(s) on which they depend. In view of the above, a person of ordinary skill in the art cannot unequivocally interpret the metes and bounds of the claims so as to understand how to avoid infringement. Applicant is reminded that any amendment must point to a basis in the specification so as not to add New Matter. See MPEP 714.02 and 2163.06. 5. 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. 6. Claims 1-4, 7, 11 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Bao et al. (US 20190071477). Bao teaches a fusion protein comprising complement Factor H (CFH) fused to an IgG Fc domain (e.g. claims 1 and 6-8). Additional amino acid sequences are fused to the CFH-Ig fusion protein, including CRIg and serum albumin (e.g. [0046]). Accordingly, the fusion proteins taught by Bao are within the scope of instant claim 1. Claim 2 is included in the rejection, because SEQ ID NO: 6 is the amino acid sequence of CRIg extracellular domain, and as such is inherently present in in Bao’s fusion protein. Claims 3, 4 and 11 are included, because they encompass all possible orders of the respective domains. Claim 7 is included, because SEQ ID NO: 8 is the amino acid sequence of factor H, and as such is inherently present in in Bao’s fusion protein. Claim 14 is included, because Bao teaches that the IgG Fc domain is from IgG1 or IgG4 (e.g. [0038]). 7. The following prior art references, cited of record but not presently relied upon, teach various embodiments or features of the present invention: US 20160326231 (cited in the previous office action) US 20220220169 US 20070190054 US 20220233756 US 20220009979 Cserhalmi et al. (2016) In vitro evaluation of a CRIg-factor H hybrid complement inhibitor. Immunobiology, Vol. 221, p. 1176. Abstract #101 (cited on IDS) Hu et al. (2018) Complement Inhibitor CRIg/FH Ameliorates Renal Ischemia Reperfusion Injury via Activation of PI3K/AKT Signaling. Journal of immunology 201: 3717-3730. 8. Conclusion: no claim is allowed. 9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ILIA I OUSPENSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-2920. The examiner can normally be reached 9 AM - 5:30 PM. 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, Julie Wu can be reached at 571-272-5205. 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. /ILIA I OUSPENSKI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1644
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 10, 2022
Application Filed
Mar 28, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600776
ANTI-L1CAM ANTIBODY OR ANTIGEN-BINDING FRAGMENT THEREOF AND CHIMERIC ANTIGEN RECEPTOR COMPRISING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12590153
TREATMENT OF PD-L1-NEGATIVE MELANOMA USING AN ANTI-PD-1 ANTIBODY AND AN ANTI-CTLA-4 ANTIBODY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590154
CANCER IMMUNOTHERAPY BY DISRUPTING PD-1/PD-L1 SIGNALING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583903
CONSTRUCTION OF CHIMERIC ANTIGEN RECEPTOR TARGETING CD20 ANTIGEN AND ACTIVITY IDENTIFICATION OF ENGINEERED T CELLS THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583934
ANTI-CD26 ANTIBODIES AND USES THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
78%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+20.5%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1097 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