Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/010,695

TARGETED ABERRANT ALPHA-SYNUCLEIN SPECIES AND INDUCED UBIQUITINATION AND PROTEOSOMAL CLEARANCE VIA CO-RECRUITMENT OF AN E3-LIGASE SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Dec 15, 2022
Examiner
FETTEROLF, BRANDON J
Art Unit
1626
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
The General Hospital Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
48%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
4y 1m
To Grant
60%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 48% of resolved cases
48%
Career Allow Rate
84 granted / 177 resolved
-12.5% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+13.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 1m
Avg Prosecution
80 currently pending
Career history
257
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.4%
-37.6% vs TC avg
§103
28.5%
-11.5% vs TC avg
§102
19.6%
-20.4% vs TC avg
§112
28.4%
-11.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 177 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Application Status The preliminary amendment filed on 12/15/2022 is acknowledged. Claims 1-20 are currently pending. Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of the following species represented by formula (I) in claim 1: -alpha-synuclein targeting ligand TL-3, -Degron D1-a, and -the linker present in Compound 7 having the structure: PNG media_image1.png 54 213 media_image1.png Greyscale , wherein the Degron is attached to the left side of the linker and the TL is attached to the right side of the linker in the reply filed on 9/02/2025 is acknowledged. Applicants assert that Claims 1, 6 and 13-20 are readable thereon. A search of the prior art renders the selected species to be obvious. In addition to the elected species, the examiner has expanded the search to include, -Alpha-synuclein targeting ligand TL-1, wherein X is the phenol and R1 is Nitro, and TL-2; and -Degron also includes D1-b. -Linker includes the alkyl linker, as well as, variations in linker length. Note: In both the alkyl and PEG linkers, the -R’C(O)N(R’)R’- is towards the Degron as set forth above. . Accordingly, claims 1-2, 4-6 and 11-20 read on the species and expanded species search. Claims 3 and 7-10 are withdrawn from consideration as being drawn to non-elected species. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement filed on 12/15/2022, 5/21/2024, 6/12/2024 and 6/13/2025 have been considered except where lined through. 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 1-2, 4-6 and 11-20 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. In the instant case, claim 1 is drawn to a bispecific compound having the formula PNG media_image2.png 42 267 media_image2.png Greyscale . Accordingly, each of the “segments” are linked via a covalent bond and not meant to be in isolation. However, claim 1 recites that the Linker (L) terminates at either or both termini in -R’C(O)N(R’)R’-, wherein R’ is H or C1-C6 alkyl. It would appear that the bond occurs at the R’ attached to the carbon or nitrogen. As such, it is unclear how this can occur is R’ is hydrogen. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim(s) 1-2, 4-6 and 11-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arvinas Operations (WO2020/041331A1, 2020-02-27, IDS) in view of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (WO2019/014429A1, 2019-01-17) referred to herein as Dana. Arvinas Operations teaches a bifunctional compound having an alpha-synuclein protein targeting moiety at one end, a linker and an E3 ubiquitin ligase binding molecule at the other end (Abstract). Arvinas Operations further provides numerous examples of the bifunctional compounds having the formula Targeting Moeity-Linker-E3 ubiquitin ligase binding molecule including, but not limited to, PNG media_image3.png 159 410 media_image3.png Greyscale , PNG media_image4.png 72 401 media_image4.png Greyscale , PNG media_image5.png 99 381 media_image5.png Greyscale , and PNG media_image6.png 84 397 media_image6.png Greyscale (page 404, Table 1, compounds 2, 3, 59 and 63). Moreover, Arvinas Operations teaches pharmaceutical compositions comprising at least one bifunctional compound and a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier (paragraph 00328). Lastly, Arvinas Operations teaches that the composition are useful in methods of treating a disease condition associated with accumulation or aggregation of alpha synuclein such as Parkinson Disease or dementia (paragraph 0007). Arvinas Operations differs from the instant claims in that the linker does not terminate at the E3 ubiquitin ligase binding molecule in a -R’C(O)N(R’)R’- or that the E3 ubiquitin ligase binding molecule is PNG media_image7.png 116 112 media_image7.png Greyscale . Moreover, Arvinas Operations does not teach that the linker is an alkyl liker terminating at the E3 ubiquitin ligase binding molecule in a -R’C(O)N(R’)R’- Dana teaches compounds of Formula I: T-L-E, wherein T is a tau protein binding moiety, E is an E3 ubiquitin binding moiety and L is a substituted or unsubstituted alkylene, substituted or unsubstituted alkenylene, substituted or unsubstituted alkynylene, substituted or unsubstituted arylene, substituted or unsubstituted heterocyclylene, substituted or unsubstituted arylene, substituted or unsubstituted heteroarylene, substituted or unsubstituted heteroalkylene, a bond or a variety of substituted heteroatoms (paragraph 00121). With regards to the E, Dana et al. teach that E includes, but is not limited to, PNG media_image8.png 132 256 media_image8.png Greyscale , PNG media_image9.png 134 258 media_image9.png Greyscale , PNG media_image10.png 139 306 media_image10.png Greyscale , PNG media_image11.png 146 295 media_image11.png Greyscale , PNG media_image12.png 162 337 media_image12.png Greyscale , PNG media_image13.png 166 316 media_image13.png Greyscale , wherein q is 1-4 (claims 46-53 of Dana). For example, Dana teaches a compound having the formula PNG media_image14.png 137 368 media_image14.png Greyscale (page 128, 1st compound). It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the instantly claimed invention, to modify the linking group or substitute the E3 ubiquitin binding moiety as taught by Arvinas Operations so that the linking group is either a PEG or alkyl which terminates with a -R’C(O)N(R’)R’- or that the E3 ubiquitin ligase binding molecule is PNG media_image7.png 116 112 media_image7.png Greyscale in view of the teachings of Dana. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification or substitution, with a reasonable expectation of success, because: -Dana teaches that both PEG and alkyl linkers ending in -R’C(O)N(R’)R’- can be linked to E3 ubiquitin ligase binding moieties and further, E3 ubiquitin ligase binding molecule PNG media_image7.png 116 112 media_image7.png Greyscale is an alternative E3 ubiquitin ligase binding molecule to choose from. It should be noted that the specification (example 13) teaches an in vitro experiment showing that the compounds can permeate the cell and engage the E3-ligase CRBN. However, the specification does not appear to show a criticality of the linker or the E3 ubiquitin ligase binding moiety. Conclusion Therefore, No claim is allowed. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRANDON J FETTEROLF whose telephone number is (571)272-2919. 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, Joseph McKane can be reached at 571-272-0699. 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. /BRANDON J FETTEROLF/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1626
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 15, 2022
Application Filed
Sep 17, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Dec 30, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 30, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594274
METHOD FOR PREPARING A CRYSTALLINE FORM OF RABEXIMOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595245
INHIBITORS OF MET KINASE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12577233
SOLID FORMS OF APOL1 INHIBITOR AND METHODS OF USING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12570640
2-AMINOQUINAZOLINES AS LRRK2 INHIBITORS, PHARMACEUTICAL COMPOSITIONS, AND USES THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12570615
NEW QUINAZOLINONE DERIVATIVES
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
48%
Grant Probability
60%
With Interview (+13.0%)
4y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 177 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