Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/013,713

PROCESS FOR PREPARING ALKYL POLYGLUCOSIDES, AND ALKYL POLYGLUCOSIDES OBTAINED ACCORDING TO THE PROCESS

Final Rejection §102§112
Filed
Dec 29, 2022
Examiner
WHITE, ASHLEY TAYLOR
Art Unit
1653
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Centre National De La Recherche Scientifique (Cnrs)
OA Round
2 (Final)
36%
Grant Probability
At Risk
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 36% of cases
36%
Career Allow Rate
4 granted / 11 resolved
-23.6% vs TC avg
Strong +78% interview lift
Without
With
+77.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
48 currently pending
Career history
59
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.0%
-30.0% vs TC avg
§103
39.8%
-0.2% vs TC avg
§102
18.4%
-21.6% vs TC avg
§112
22.7%
-17.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 11 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Priority This application claims benefit of priority to French Republic Application No. FR2007021 filed on 07/02/2020. This application is also a 371 of PCT/FR2021/051220 filed on 07/02/2021. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Drawings The corrected Drawings filed 12/15/2025 are accepted by the Examiner. Amendment and Claim Status In the reply filed on 12/15/2025, Applicant amended claims 1, 12 and 17-19 and added new claim 22. Claims 1-16 and 18-21 were previously withdrawn by the Examiner as they are not encompassed by the elected group and species. Claims 1-22 are pending. Claims 1-16 and 18-21 are withdrawn. Claims 17 and 22 are under examination. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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 17 and 22 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 claim(s) contains 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. This is a new matter rejection. Claim 17 has been amended to recite “a linear or branched glucoside part comprising n+m glycosyl units” in line 9 of the claim. Applicant indicated support for this limitation could be found throughout the Specification, and at least in original claims 1-20. The instant Specification does not recite the term ‘glycosyl unit’ at all nor do the original claims. The instant Specification and original claims only recite ‘glucosyl unit.’ A glycosyl unit is much broader in scope than a glucosyl unit as a glycosyl unit can be any sugar unit, such as glucose, fructose, mannose and many others, while a glucosyl unit specifically refers to glucose. There is not support for this much broader scope in the instant Specification or the original claims. This is new matter. 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 17 and 22 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. Claim 17, as amended, recites: An alkyl polyglucoside obtained by the method of claim 1, wherein the alkyl polyglucoside is of formula (I): [Glc]m-[Glc]n(-O-R) (I) Wherein: R represents a linear or branched, saturated or unsaturated alkyl group, comprising between 8 and 20 carbon atoms, [Glc]m-[Glc]n represents a linear or branched glucoside part comprising n+m glycosyl units, n+m being between 3 and 200. It is noted the claim is directed to an alkyl polyglucoside, meaning the sugar units are glucose molecules. As amended, claim 17 now recites the “glucoside part comprising n+m glycosyl units” in lines 7-8 above whereas claim 17 prior to amendment recited “glucoside part comprising n+m glucosyl units.” Applicant indicated the amendment was to correct minor/typographical errors. However, the use of glycosyl units significantly broadens the claim because glycosyl units can be any sugar molecule, such as glucose, fructose, mannose and many others. Thus, it is unclear how the alkyl polyglucoside can be composed of glycosyl units, which can be any sugar molecule, and still be considered an alkyl polyglucoside, meaning comprising glucose molecules. Moreover, formula (I) of claim 17 specifically recites [Glc]m-[Glc]n(-O-R), and the instant Specification states [Glc]m and [Glc]n represent glucoside fraction and correspond to the number of n or m glucosyl units (Page 7, Lines 30-34 – Page 8, Line 1). Thus, claim 17 is overall unclear. Claim 22 is included in this rejection as it is dependent upon claim 17 and does not clear up the indefiniteness. 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. (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. Claims 17 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CAS Registry Number: RN 122934-62-7. [Database Registry Chemical Abstracts Service, Columbus, Ohio, Accession No. RN 122934-62-7, Entered STN: 29 Sep 1989] (Of Record). Regarding claim 17, it is noted the claim recites ‘comprising,’ which is open language and allows for incorporation of unclaimed or undisclosed constituents. Additionally, Applicant did not elect one particular alkyl polyglucoside, but rather, multiple components that ‘comprise’ the claimed alkyl polyglucoside. For example, Applicant elected R is octyl (corresponding to octyl-β-D-glucoside), and while this is an integral part of the compound, it is not present in the compound as octyl-β-D-glucoside because it is attached to other constituents. Therefore, while the alkyl polyglucoside must comprise the components elected by Applicant, it can also comprise additional constituents and still read on the alkyl polyglucoside as-claimed. CAS Registry Number: RN 122934-62-7 reads on an alkyl polyglucoside wherein R is octyl (corresponding to octyl-β-D-glucoside), n=1, m=3 (n+m=4) and has 100% alpha 1,6 bonds. Thus, CAS Registry Number: RN 122934-62-7 anticipates instant claim 17. Structure included below. PNG media_image1.png 456 702 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 110 662 media_image2.png Greyscale Regarding claim 22, it is noted claim 22 is only partially encompassed by the previous election of species. In the election of species, Applicant elected R = octyl (8), n = 1 and m = 2 to 7. Claim 22 recites “when R represents an alkyl group comprising 8 to 12 carbon atoms, n+m is between 7 and 200” in lines 1-2. According to the election of species, n+m = 3 to 8. Even such, compound RN 122934-62-7 has 7 glucosyl units (n+m = 7), falling within the range given by claim 22, and is therefore anticipated by RN 122934-62-7. 35 USC § 102 - Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 12/15/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argued CAS Registry Number: RN 122934-62-7 does not anticipate the instantly claimed alkyl polyglucoside because the IUPAC definition of glycosyl is ‘the structure obtained by removing the hydroxyl group from the hemiacetal function of a monosaccharide and, by extension, of a lower oligosaccharide’ on Page 13. Applicant also attached the definition quoted in the arguments. It is important to note the attached definition from IUPAC refers to a ‘glycosyl group’ while instant claim 17, as-amended, recites a ‘glycosyl unit.’ A ‘glycosyl group’ and a ‘glycosyl unit’ are not the same thing. A ‘glycosyl group’ is a specific chemical group while a ‘glycosyl unit’ is the sugar molecule itself. This is made clear by the description of glycosides given by IUPAC which specifically states “the bond between the glycosyl group and the OR group is called a glycosidic bond” (IUPAC, 1995). Thus, it is clear the definition of a ‘glycosyl group’ provided by Applicant is referring to a specific chemical group that forms a bond between another chemical group, not the sugar molecule as a whole. One of ordinary skill in the art, when looking at RN 122934-62-7, would very clearly recognize the compound as an alkyl polyglucoside as it has a chain of glucose molecules attached to an alkyl group. It is acknowledged that the alkyl polyglucoside represented by RN 122934-62-7 is a substituted alkyl polyglucoside, however, there is nothing within the claim suggesting the compound cannot be substituted. Therefore, the Examiner maintains the position that RN 122934-62-7 anticipates instant claims 17 and 22. Conclusion Claims 17 and 22 are rejected. No claims are allowed. 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 ASHLEY T WHITE whose telephone number is (571)272-0683. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 - 5:00 EST. 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, Sharmila Landau can be reached at (571)272-0614. 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. /A.T.W./Examiner, Art Unit 1653 /SHARMILA G LANDAU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1653
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 29, 2022
Application Filed
Sep 18, 2025
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Sep 26, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112
Dec 15, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 06, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12577570
MODIFIED NEURAMINIDASE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12576139
METHOD AND DRUG FOR TREATING SPINAL MUSCULAR ATROPHY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12552845
ADHESIVE ELASTIN AND SUCKERIN-BASED MULTIBLOCK COPOLYPEPTIDE WITH STIMULUS RESPONSIVENESS AND SURFACE ADHESION, SELF-ASSEMBLED STRUCTURE THEREOF, AND APPLICATION OF INJECTABLE HYDROGEL AS BIOADHESIVE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12545939
NOVEL L-TYROSINE-EXPORTING PROTEIN VARIANT AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING L-TYROSINE USING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12454709
RECOMBINANT VECTOR FOR TRANSFORMATION IMPROVING GLUTAMINE PRODUCTIVITY, AND STRAIN EMPLOYING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 28, 2025
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
36%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+77.8%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 11 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