Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 18/027,888

ARYLAZABICYCLO[2.1.1]HEXYLMETHANOLS DERIVATIVES AND MEDICAL USES THEREOF

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Nov 29, 2023
Priority
Sep 23, 2020 — GB 2015044.7 +1 more
Examiner
WEDDINGTON, KEVIN E
Art Unit
1629
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Atrogi AB
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
85%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allowance Rate
1095 granted / 1454 resolved
+15.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+9.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
1481
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
47.6%
+7.6% vs TC avg
§102
17.9%
-22.1% vs TC avg
§112
18.6%
-21.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1454 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Claims 1-6, 8-13, 15, 18, 21, 23, 24, 27, 31 and 32 are presented for examination. Applicants’ preliminary amendment filed March 22, 2023 has been received and entered. Applicants’ information disclosure statements filed August 14, 2023; October 29, 2024; January 14, 2025; and April 10, 2026 have been received and entered. Applicants’ election filed April 10, 2026 in response to the restriction requirement of February 12, 2026 has been received and entered. The applicants elected the invention described in claims 1-13 and 15 (Group I) without traverse. Claims 1-6, 8-13 and 15 will be examined. Claims 18, 21, 23, 24, 27, 31 and 32 are withdrawn from consideration as being drawn to the non-elected invention (37 CFR 1.142(b)). Priority Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1, 3-6, 9-13 and 15 are allowable. Clams 18, 21, 23, 24, 27, 31 and 32 will be rejoined and examined, therefore, claims 1, 3-6, 9-13, 15, 18 and 21 are allowable. 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 27, 31 and 32 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 Written Description rejection. A lack of adequate written description issue arises if the knowledge and level of skill in the art would not permit one skilled in the art to immediately envisage the product claimed from the disclosed process. See, e.g., Fujikawa v. Wattanasin, 93 F.3d 1559, 1571, 39 USPQ2d 1895, 1905 (Fed. Cir. 1996) (a "laundry list" disclosure of every possible moiety does not constitute a written description of every species in a genus because it would not "reasonably lead" those skilled in the art to any particular species); In re Ruschig, 379 F.2d 990, 995, 154 USPQ 118, 123 (CCPA 1967). An applicant may also show that an invention is complete by disclosure of sufficiently detailed, relevant identifying characteristics which provide evidence that applicant was in possession of the claimed invention, i.e., complete or partial structure, other physical and/or chemical properties, functional characteristics when coupled with a known or disclosed correlation between function and structure, or some combination of such characteristics. In particular, the specification as original filed fails to provide sufficient written bases of any of the agents demonstrating wherein possession of use of the broad terms: a non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, and a disease or disorder which is mediated by activation of the β2 adrenergic receptor. The mere fact that Applicant may have discovered one type of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease treated with a compound of Formula I is not sufficient to claim the entire genus. The mere fact that Applicant may have discovered one type of disease or disorder which is mediated by activation of the β2 adrenergic receptor is treated with a compound of Formula I and a pharmaceutical composition comprising a compound of Formula I is not sufficient to claim the entire genus. The written description requirement for a claimed genus may be satisfied through sufficient description of a representative number of species by actual reduction to practice, reduction to drawings, or by disclosure of relevant, identifying characteristics, i.e., structure or other physical and/or chemical properties, by functional characteristics coupled with a known or disclosed correlation between function and structure, or by a combination of such identifying characteristics, sufficient to show the applicant was in possession of the claimed genus. See Eli Lilly, 119 F.3d at 1568, 43 USPQ2d at 1406. A "representative number of species" means that the species which are adequately described are representative of the entire genus. Thus, when there is substantial variation within the genus, one must describe a sufficient variety of species to reflect the variation within the genus. The disclosure of only one species encompassed within a genus adequately describes a claim directed to that genus only if the disclosure "indicates that the patentee has invented species sufficient to constitute the gen[us]." Claims 27, 31 and 32 are not allowed. 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 2, 8, 23 and 24 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 2 is rendered indefinite and vague because the “X” substituent is not in disclosed in Formula IA. The applicants state each X represents X1 or X2, but where is X in the Formula IA? Claim 8 is rendered indefinite to the extent that it incorporates the above terminology. Claims 23 and 24 are rendered indefinite by the phrase “characterised”, the correct spelling should be –characterized’’. Claims 2, 8, 23 and 24 are not allowed. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN E WEDDINGTON whose telephone number is (571)272-0587. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 1:30-10:00. 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, Jeff Lundgren can be reached at 571-272-5541. 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. KEVIN E. WEDDINGTON Primary Examiner Art Unit 1629 /KEVIN E WEDDINGTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1629
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 29, 2023
Application Filed
Apr 03, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
May 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12629390
STABILIZED AMORPHOUS CALCIUM CARBONATE FOR TREATMENT OF NEUROLOGICAL, MUSCULAR AND INFERTILITY DISEASES OR CONDITIONS
4y 5m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12629372
Development of Combined Therapeutic Agent for Fibrotic Disease
3y 5m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12622897
METHODS OF TREATING MIGRAINE
1y 2m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Patent 12616697
Methods of Treatment with Myosin Modulator
3y 2m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Patent 12611415
METHODS AND COMPOUNDS FOR TREATMENT OF METABOLIC DISEASE
4y 1m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
75%
Grant Probability
85%
With Interview (+9.9%)
2y 5m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1454 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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