Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/018,422

SOS1 INHIBITORS

Final Rejection §102§112
Filed
Jan 27, 2023
Examiner
DAVIS, BRIAN J
Art Unit
1614
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Mirati Therapeutics Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
1y 11m
To Grant
80%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
1317 granted / 1549 resolved
+25.0% vs TC avg
Minimal -5% lift
Without
With
+-4.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 11m
Avg Prosecution
47 currently pending
Career history
1596
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.0%
-36.0% vs TC avg
§103
16.0%
-24.0% vs TC avg
§102
19.4%
-20.6% vs TC avg
§112
43.6%
+3.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1549 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 . Claim Objections Withdrawn The objection to claim 61, outlined in the previous Office Action, has been overcome by inventor’s amendment. The amendment cancels the claim. The objection to claims 2-4, 8-13, 15, 16, 19-28, 30, 31, 33-36, 39-51 and 53-55, as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but otherwise allowable, is withdrawn. The objection is moot. (The amendment cancels claims 2, 27, 28, 30 and 31.) Claim Objections, NEW Claim 33 is objected to because of the following informalities: in the definition of variable R7, the letter “…s…” should be the verb: is. Appropriate correction is required. Inventor’s assistance is respectfully requested in correcting any other minor grammatical and/or spelling errors which may be present in the claim set. 112(b) Rejections Withdrawn The rejections of claims 14, 17, 18, 29, 32 and 56-72 under 35 USC 112(b) or 35 USC 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, outlined in the previous Office Action, have been overcome by inventor’s amendment. The amendment cancels the claims. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b), NEW 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. Claim 1 is 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. It is unclear why a definition for a variable R7 is recited in the claim when no such variable is present in the diagramed structure or its corresponding variable definitions. The examiner respectfully suggests deleting the definition. Claims 8-11 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. It is unclear why definitions for variables R2 and R9 are recited in the claims when no such variables are present in the diagramed structures or their corresponding variable definitions. The examiner respectfully suggests deleting the definitions. Claim 33 is 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 definition of variable R1, the definition of variable Q is unclear because it is undefined. Claim 55 is 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. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the diagramed structures in the claim. Note that inventor’s latest amendment to independent claim 1, the claim from which claim 55 immediately depends, now defines X as simply N (i.e. a nitrogen atom). The corresponding moiety in the X position in the diagramed structures, however, is a CH. Claims 3, 4, 34-36, 39-51, 53 and 54 are also 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. The claims all depend, or ultimately depend, from an indefinite claim yet do not relieve the indefiniteness. Dependent claims 3, 4, 34-36, 39-51, 53 and 54 are also, therefore, indefinite. 112(d) Rejections Withdrawn The rejection of claim 38 under 35 USC 112(d) or 35 USC 112 (pre-AIA ), fourth paragraph, outlined in the previous Office Action, has been overcome by inventor’s amendment. The amendment cancels the claim. 102 Rejections Withdrawn The rejection of claims 1, 5-7, 37 and 52 under 35 USC 102(a)(1), outlined in the previous Office Action, has been overcome by inventor’s amendment. With respect to claims 5-7, 37 and 52, the amendment cancels the claims. With respect to claim 1, the amendment narrows the scope of the claimed subject matter such that it no longer reads on the cited art. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102, NEW 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 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Acta Chimica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae (1978), 98(3), pp. 303-313, prior art of record. The reference teaches inventor’s compound (page 306, Table I, Product (6)p (i.e. the last entry)). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 12, 13, 15, 16 and 19-26 are allowed. Conclusion 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 BRIAN J DAVIS whose telephone number is (571)272-0638. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00 PM 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, Ali Soroush, can be reached at 571-272-9925. 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. /BRIAN J DAVIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1614 2/20/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 27, 2023
Application Filed
Aug 19, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112
Jan 22, 2026
Response Filed
Feb 20, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594226
COMPOSITION FOR AMELIORATING SKIN CONDITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594257
MEANS AND METHODS FOR IMPROVING ANTI-TUMORAL EFFICACY OF TRANSMEMBRANE CHANNEL PROTEIN BLOCKERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594242
LIPID COMPOUNDS AND LIPID NANOPARTICLE COMPOSITIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595280
PHOSPHORAMIDATES FOR THE TREATMENT OF HEPATITIS B VIRUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12576107
METHODS OF TREATING CHRONIC INFLAMMATORY DISEASES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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
85%
Grant Probability
80%
With Interview (-4.8%)
1y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1549 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