Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/030,426

COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR CANCER DIAGNOSIS

Non-Final OA §102§112§DP
Filed
Apr 05, 2023
Examiner
STOICA, ELLY GERALD
Art Unit
1647
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Aoa Dx
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allow Rate
807 granted / 1211 resolved
+6.6% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+22.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
1242
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.9%
-36.1% vs TC avg
§103
26.7%
-13.3% vs TC avg
§102
19.9%
-20.1% vs TC avg
§112
34.1%
-5.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1211 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112 §DP
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, discloses and claims only subject matter disclosed in PCT/US21/53503. In the Provisional Application 63/087427, the composition comprising a ganglioside having the structure: (A)x-[ (P)y-(L)z ]-(M)b; wherein A is a ganglioside, or any portion thereof; x is an integer from 1 to 32; P is a heteroaryl; y is 1; L is a linker; z is an integer from 0 to 8; M is a core; and b is 0 or 1 is not claimed or disclosed per se. Accordingly, the priority of the instant Application is recognized to the filing date of the PCT Application: 10/05/2021. Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of (Group I -claims 1, 7 and 112-124) in the reply filed on 01/20/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 1, 7, 11-14 and 111-124 are pending; claims 11-14 and 111 are withdrawn from prosecution for being drawn to non-elected subject matter. Claims 1, 7 and 112-124 are examined. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS)s submitted on 04/05/2023, 10/23/2024, 10/03/2025 were considered by the examiner. The listing of references in the specification is not a proper information disclosure statement. 37 CFR 1.98(b) requires a list of all patents, publications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office, and MPEP § 609.04(a) states, "the list may not be incorporated into the specification but must be submitted in a separate paper." Therefore, unless the references have been cited by the examiner on form PTO-892, they have not been considered. 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. Claim 1, 117 and 118 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. Specifically, the structure (A)x-[(P)y-(L)z]-(M)b of claim 1 and the definition of its constituents are vague and unclear for several reasons: The minuses "-" appear to require that (i) each "A" is directly linked to a "P" (a heteroaryl), and (ii) each "P" is directly linked to "L" (if z is not 0) or directly linked to "M" (if b is not 0). However, it is not conceivable how up to 32 gangliosides can be linked to a single "P" (y is 1 and x can be up to 32). In the same line of reasoning, it is not clear how up to 8 linkers "L" can be linked to a single "P" (a heteroaryl) (y is 1 and z can be up to 8). It is not clear why a linker "L" should be present, if "M" is absent, because there is nothing to link (z is independent of b). If "A" can be "any portion" of a ganglioside, the definition of "A" is unclear, since this includes any kind of fragment as small as an individual atom. It is unclear what the “core” is; a "core" can be an "amine" according to claim 116, the term can refer to anything and everything such as a carbon atom of a methylene moiety or an oxygen atom of an ether moiety. The subject-matter of claim 8 is unclear, because GloboH, PSA, do not represent "gangliosides". As such, the metes and bounds of the claims could not be determined. 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. Claims 1, 112-115, 117-119 and 124 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chang et al. (WO 2017048823- cited by Applicant). Chang et al. discloses a composition based on 1 to 4 GloboH antigens or ganglioside antigens such as GD2, GD3, GM2, or fucosyl GM1 that are conjugated via 1 to 4 1,2,3-triazole moieties (comprising one hydrogen substituent) to 1 to 4 consecutive lysine residues at the C-terminal end of a peptide epitope representing a core. (formula II, Scheme 2, [0020], [0030], [0058], [0059], [0098]; claims 1, 2, 10-14; example 4 ). Thus, in the broadest reasonable interpretation, claims 1, 112-115, 117-119 and 124 are anticipated by the reference cited. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 1, 7, 112-119 and 124 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-18 of U.S. Patent No. 11, 786, 586. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the subject matter claimed in the instant Application is already claimed in the U.S. Patent claims. Claims 120-121 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-18 of U.S. Patent No. 11, 786, 586. The claims add the limitations that the ganglioside anticipated by the U.S. Patent is ganglioside is detectably labeled with an enzyme, a prosthetic group, streptavidin, biotin, a fluorophore, a luminescent tag, a bioluminescent tag, and/or a radioisotope. The labeling of compound was widely used in the art at the time that the invention was filed so a that a person of ordinary skill in the art would have applied well-known and widely used reagents and techniques in order to successfully label the compound claimed in the U.S. Patent, that anticipates the instantly claimed compound. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 122 and 123 are 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. Conclusion No claims are allowed. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELLY GERALD STOICA whose telephone number is (571)272-9941. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 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, Joanne Hama can be reached at 571-272-2911. 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. ELLY-GERALD STOICA Primary Examiner Art Unit 1647 /Elly-Gerald Stoica/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1647
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 05, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 02, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112, §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600785
Method of screening for compounds that inhibit proliferation of pancreatic cancer cells having a loss -of-function mutation in the RNF43 gene
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600773
Treatment of diuretic resistant heart failure patients having at least one copy of the TMPRSS6 rs855791 allele
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12590145
TRANSFORMING GROWTH FACTOR-BETA-RESPONSIVE POLYPEPTIDES AND THEIR METHODS FOR USE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583928
NOVEL IGFR-LIKE RECEPTOR AND USES THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582675
METHODS FOR TREATMENT OF CANCERS HARBORING AN H3K27M MUTATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
67%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+22.7%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1211 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