Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/014,300

ANTI-VIRAL COMPOUNDS AND METHODS FOR SCREENING SAME AND TREATING VIRAL INFECTIONS

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jan 03, 2023
Examiner
HASTINGS, ALISON AZAR
Art Unit
1627
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
38 granted / 61 resolved
+2.3% vs TC avg
Strong +38% interview lift
Without
With
+38.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
47 currently pending
Career history
108
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.2%
-37.8% vs TC avg
§103
29.5%
-10.5% vs TC avg
§102
16.6%
-23.4% vs TC avg
§112
26.8%
-13.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 61 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION All rejections and objections not mentioned below have been withdrawn. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 09/26/2025 has been entered. 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 Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for priority. The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 63/048,169, filed on 7/5/2020. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/03/2023 is being considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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. Claim(s) 11-12 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Hou (Hou, Ming-Hon, Hsu, Chai-Ning, Protein Science, (DEC 2017) Vol. 26, No. Suppl. 1, Sp. Iss. SI, pp. 196). The reference Hou teaches(abstract): PNG media_image1.png 371 942 media_image1.png Greyscale This anticipates claims 11-12 and claim 18. 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. Claim(s) 11-16 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hou (Hou, Ming-Hon, Hsu, Chai-Ning, Protein Science, (DEC 2017) Vol. 26, No. Suppl. 1, Sp. Iss. SI, pp. 196) in view of Papageorgiou (Papageorgiou et al., Structural characterization of the N-terminal part of the MERS-CoV nucleocapsid by X-ray diffraction and small-angle X-ray scattering. Acta Cryst. (2016). D72, 192–202). The reference Hou teaches(abstract): PNG media_image1.png 371 942 media_image1.png Greyscale This helps to teach claims 11-16 and 18. The reference Hou does not teach the detecting a hydrophobic contacts between the compound and the hydrophobic pocket of a dimeric interface of the N-NTDs (claims 13-16). The reference Papageorgiou teaches “Recently, an inhibitor of the RNA–N interaction has been demonstrated to have an antiviral effect on HCoV-OC43 (Lin et al., 2014). The coronavirus N protein is thus an attractive target for antiviral research. Because of the world wide spread of MERS-CoV, with potential risks for healthcare, it is important to accumulate structural and functional information on MERS-CoV proteins in order to provide tools for antiviral development. In this study, we present the three-dimensional structure of the MERS-CoV NTD with its upstream IDR region (hereafter referred to as NTD+) at a resolution of 2.4 A ˚ obtained by X-ray diffraction measurements as well as a small-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS) study of the protein in solution in order to assess the oligomerization state of MERS-CoV NTD+, and propose a structural model of NTD+ including its disordered region” (pages 193-194) and “Analyses of the molecular arrangement within the crystal show stacking of Pro33 in front of the Trp43 residue belonging to the nearby molecule. The same stacking is also found within the crystal packing of the IBV NTD structure as presented in Fig. 5. In these figures hydrophobic residues (Val, Ile, Leu, Phe, Trp, Cys, Ala, Tyr, His, Thr, Ser, Gly and Lys) following the classification of Livingstone & Barton (1993) are labelled in green and highlight the conserved hydrophobic propensity of the core domain”(page 196-197). The reference also teaches “In addition to these interactions, the conserved hydrophobic core domain could interact with bases of the RNA through several aromatic residues (Huang et al., 2004; McBride et al., 2014; Spencer & Hiscox, 2006)”(page 200) and the figures 5 and 1 shown below. This help to teach claims 13-16. PNG media_image2.png 169 784 media_image2.png Greyscale PNG media_image3.png 869 734 media_image3.png Greyscale It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have modified Hou with Papageorgiou to achieve the instant invention because both references discuss coronavirus N protein as an attractive target for antiviral research and both discuss researching the crystal structure of the NTD region for a better understanding of structure function relation to treat the virus. One would be motivated to study the crystal structure of the docked compounds according to Hou and one would be motivated to target the hydrophobic pocket and its interaction with the target compounds because Papageorgiou teaches a hydrophobic core including Trp43 that interacts with other molecules of itself and it is part of the RNA binding NTD region. Thus if one is targeting the NTD dimerization domain one would have a reasonable expectation of success of interactions with the hydrophobic core and Trp43. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 17 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Response to Arguments Applicant’s declaration, see 1-2, filed 12/29/2025, with respect to inventor name spelling has been fully considered and is persuasive. The rejection of claims 11-18 due to Lin (Shan-Meng Lin et al., Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 2020 63 (6), 3131-3141, published 2/27/2020) has been withdrawn. Conclusion Claims 11-16 and 18 are rejected. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALISON AZAR HASTINGS whose telephone number is (703)756-4584. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 7:30am-5pm EST Friday 7:30-4pm EST (every other Friday off). 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, Kortney Klinkel can be reached at (571) 270-5239. 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.A.H./ Examiner, Art Unit 1627 /Kortney L. Klinkel/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1627
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 03, 2023
Application Filed
Jun 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Sep 26, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 07, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Dec 29, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 29, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 06, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 11, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600711
TRIAZACYCLODODECANSULFONAMIDE (TCD)-BASED PROTEIN SECRETION INHIBITORS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12582650
IRAK4 KINASE INHIBITOR AND PREPARATION METHOD THEREFOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583837
SOLID FORMS COMPRISING (S)-2-(2,6-DIOXOPIPERIDIN-3-YL)-4-((2-FLUORO-4-((3-MORPHOLINOAZETIDIN-1-YL)METHYL)BENZYL)AMINO)ISOINDOLINE-1,3-DIONE AND SALTS THEREOF, AND COMPOSITIONS COMPRISING AND METHODS OF USING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12570648
6,7-DIHYDRO-5H-PYRIDO[2,3-C]PYRIDAZINE DERIVATIVES AND RELATED COMPOUNDS AS BCL-XL PROTEIN INHIBITORS AND PRO-APOPTOTIC AGENTS FOR TREATING CANCER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12564591
HCK AS A THERAPEUTIC TARGET IN MYD88 MUTATED DISEASES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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
62%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+38.1%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 61 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month