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 .
Election/Restrictions
The election of species requirement set forth in the restriction mailed on 23 June 2025 is hereby withdrawn. The full scope of the compounds of Claim 6 were searched, with no prior art retrieved (See STN Search, Search Notes).
Claims 16-21, 24-26, and 28 remain withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 26 September 2025.
Claims 1-4, 7, and 10 have been cancelled. Claims 6, 12, 15-18, 20-22, and 24 have undergone amendments. Claims 16-21, 24-26, and 28 are withdrawn. Thus, Claims 6, 12, 15, and 22, submitted on 17 December 2025, represent all claims currently under consideration.
Response to Arguments
The 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of Claims 1-4, 6, 10, 12, and 22 over Agrawal in view of Thornber and Gaikwad is withdrawn. Applicant has amended Claim 6 to require that the presence of a piperidine ring, rather than the piperazine which is disclosed by Agrawal. Applicant has also provided data demonstrating that the substitution of -CH2- for -S-, and substitution of piperidine for piperazine unexpectedly results in significantly improved anti-tumor activity and pharmacokinetics.
The 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of Claims 1-4, 6, 10, 12, and 22 over Artman in view of Thornber and Gaikwad is withdrawn. Applicant has amended Claim 6 to require that the presence of a piperidine ring, rather than the piperazine which is disclosed by Artman. Applicant has also provided data demonstrating that the substitution of -CH2- for -S-, and substitution of piperidine for piperazine unexpectedly results in significantly improved anti-tumor activity and pharmacokinetics.
The 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of Claims 1-4, 6, 10, 12, 15 and 22 over Hansen in view of Thornber and Gaikwad is withdrawn. Applicant has amended Claim 6 to require that the presence of a piperidine ring, rather than the piperazine which is disclosed by Hansen. Applicant has also provided data demonstrating that the substitution of -CH2- for -S-, and substitution of piperidine for piperazine unexpectedly results in significantly improved anti-tumor activity and pharmacokinetics.
The 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of Claims 1-4, 6, 10, 12, 15, and 22 over Man in view of Thornber and Gaikwad is withdrawn. Applicant has amended Claim 6 to require that variable R4a is phenyl substituted with fluorine and cyano. Applicant correctly indicates that Man does not disclose that the phenyl ring substituent on variable R3 can be substituted with cyano, but rather states that this moiety can only be substituted with alkyl, alkoxy, or halogen. Thus, in view of the teachings of Man, the artisan would have no motivation to modify these compounds to specifically select cyano as a substituent on this phenyl substituent.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)- NEW GROUNDS OF REJECTION
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 6, 12, 15, 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. Claims 6 and 12 are rejected as indefinite as there is no “and” prior to the conclusion of the description of each variable for the compounds of Formula IIG. Claims 15 and 22 are similarly rejected as indefinite as dependent upon an indefinite claim without resolving the underlying issue of indefiniteness.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 12, 15, and 22 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The closest prior art comes from Hansen (Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, 2020, 63, 6648-6676, Published: 4 March 2020) and Man (US 2011/0196150; Publication Date: 11 August 2011). Hansen discloses the compound CC-92480, which differs from the compounds of the examined application by having a -CH2- linking group rather than -S-, and a piperazine ring rather than piperidine. Applicant has provided data demonstrating that replacing these two groups provides unexpected improvements to both anti-tumor activity as well as the pharmacokinetics of the compound, which the artisan would not expect from performing a bioisosteric substitution. Man discloses similar compounds, which have a -CH2- linker rather than -S-, and do not contain a phenyl ring substituted with cyano. There is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation found with in Man to modify these compounds to include a cyano group, and no reasonable expectation of success that this modification would result in a compound with similar activity.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Claims 6, 12, 15, and 22 are rejected.
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 PHILLIP MATTHEW RZECZYCKI whose telephone number is (703)756-5326. The examiner can normally be reached Monday Thru Friday 730AM-5PM 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, Andrew Kosar can be reached at 571-272-0913. 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.
/P.M.R./Examiner, Art Unit 1625 /Andrew D Kosar/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1625