Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/034,821

METHODS FOR TREATING OPHTHALMOLOGICAL CONDITIONS

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
May 01, 2023
Examiner
LIPPOLIS, ALEXANDRA ROSE
Art Unit
1637
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Iveric Bio Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
32%
Grant Probability
At Risk
1-2
OA Rounds
4y 2m
To Grant
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 32% of cases
32%
Career Allow Rate
6 granted / 19 resolved
-28.4% vs TC avg
Strong +63% interview lift
Without
With
+63.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 2m
Avg Prosecution
61 currently pending
Career history
80
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
7.3%
-32.7% vs TC avg
§103
31.2%
-8.8% vs TC avg
§102
22.3%
-17.7% vs TC avg
§112
30.0%
-10.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 19 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 . Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for priority based on a provisional application filed as 63/108,428 on 11/01/2020. All claims are given the priority date of 11/01/2020. Application Status Receipt is acknowledged of amendment, filed 04/04/2025. Claims 8-10, 14, 15, 17, 18 and 20 are currently pending. Information Disclosure Statement Receipt of acknowledgment of the information disclosure statements filed on 11/07/2024 and 05/01/2023 have been received and all references have been considered. Drawings The drawings are objected to for the following reasons: 37 CFR 1.84 (u)(1) states “View numbers must be preceded by the abbreviation "FIG."” In the current case, the view numbers for Figures 1-7 are preceded by the word "Figure" instead of the abbreviation "FIG.". Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Objections Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 8 recites “wherein the pegylated anti-CS agent is an Aptamer”. It is interpreted that “anti-CS” is supposed to be “anti-C5”. It would be remedial to amend “anti-CS” to recite “anti-C5”. Claim 8 recites the abbreviations for “iRORA” and “cRORA”. The abbreviations for the ophthalmological diseases, disorders and/or conditions should be spelled out in the first appearance of the claims and should be followed by the abbreviation in parentheses. Appropriate correction is required. 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 8 and 14 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. Regarding claims 8 and 14, the phrase "about" renders the claims vague and indefinite in that the metes and bounds of the phrase are unclear. The phrase is unclear in that “about” does not define what the amount of the composition would need to be administered to accomplish the desired effects. Also, the phrase “about” does not define how much variation in the dose is possible to accomplish the desired effects. It would be remedial to replace the phrase “about” with the specific dosage or range of dose required to accomplish effective treatment. Claim 8 is vague and indefinite in that the metes and bounds of the phrase “high-risk drusen” are unclear. The phrase is unclear in that “high-risk drusen” does not define what characteristics, signs or symptoms of the specific disease, condition or disorder the subject would be required to have to be considered as having “high-risk drusen”. It would be remedial to replace the phrase “high-risk drusen” with “drusen”. 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 8-10, 14, 15, 17, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Patel et al (WO 2015/006734 A1) as evidenced by Guymer et al (The American Academy of Ophthalmology, Vol 127, No. 3, March 2020; Pgs. 394-409). Regarding claims 8 and 14, “iRORA” and “cRORA” are interpreted as atrophic stages of dry-type (non-exudative) AMD, related to geographic atrophy, named according to the affected anatomic layers on OCT (instant specification para. 0008). Patel teaches the dry age-related macular degeneration is associated with the formation of drusen wherein the treating or preventing dry macular degeneration encompasses treating or preventing an abnormality of the retinal pigment epithelium and/or underlying vasculature, known as choriocapilaries, and wherein the examples of abnormalities of the retinal pigment epithelium include geographic atrophy, non-geographic atrophy, focal hypopigmentation, and focal hyperpigmentation [00144]. Patel teaches ocular dosages of compositions comprising anti-C5 aptamers, such as ARC 1905 and ARC 187, or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof, can range from about 0.1 mg to about 3 mg/eye wherein the composition is administered intravitreally [00308]. Patel teaches the pegylated anti-C5 specific aptamer is a compound, ARC1905 [00106 and 00115-00116] or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof, where Aptamer = fCmGfCfCGfCmGmGfUfCfUfCmAmGmGfCGfCfUmGmAmGfUfCfUmGmAmGfUfUfUAfCfCfUmGfCmG-3T (SEQ ID NO: 26) wherein fC and fU = 2'-fluoro nucleotides, and mG and mA = 2'-OMe nucleotides and all other nucleotides are 2'-OH and where 3T indicates and inverted deoxy thymidine wherein each 20 kDa mPEG of the above structure has a molecular weight of about 20 kDa [00117-00118]. Guymer is only cited to show that the atrophic stages of AMD should be named according to the affected anatomic layers on OCT wherein the term complete RPE and outer retinal atrophy (cRORA) was proposed as an end point for geographic atrophy that occurred in the presence of drusen and was defined by the following criteria: (1) a region of hypertransmission of at least 250 mm in diameter, (2) a zone of attenuation or disruption of the RPE of at least 250 mm in diameter, and (3) evidence of overlying photoreceptor degeneration, all occurring in the absence of signs of an RPE tear (Page 397, Column 1). Guymer continues to show that the term incomplete RPE and outer retinal atrophy (iRORA) was introduced to describe a stage of AMD in which these OCT signs were present but did not fulfill all the criteria for cRORA (Page 397, Column 1). Regarding claims 9 and 15, Patel teaches the pegylated anti-C5 specific aptamer is a compound, ARC1905, having the structure set forth below: PNG media_image1.png 71 633 media_image1.png Greyscale [00106 and 00115-00116]. Regarding claims 10, 17, 18 and 20, “iRORA” and “cRORA” are interpreted as atrophic stages of dry-type (non-exudative) AMD, related to geographic atrophy, named according to the affected anatomic layers shown on Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) (instant specification para. 0008). Patel teaches the dry age-related macular degeneration is associated with the formation of drusen wherein the treating or preventing dry macular degeneration encompasses treating or preventing an abnormality of the retinal pigment epithelium and/or underlying vasculature, known as choriocapilaries, and wherein the examples of abnormalities of the retinal pigment epithelium include geographic atrophy, non-geographic atrophy, focal hypopigmentation, and focal hyperpigmentation [00144]. Conclusion No claims are allowed. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDRA ROSE LIPPOLIS whose telephone number is (703)756-5450. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:00am to 5:00pm 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, JENNIFER A DUNSTON can be reached at (571) 272-2916. 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. /ALEXANDRA ROSE LIPPOLIS/Examiner, Art Unit 1637 /Jennifer Dunston/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1637
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 01, 2023
Application Filed
May 01, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 04, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599637
A GENETICALLY MODIFIED LACTOBACILLUS AND USES THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600958
METHODS AND COMPOSITIONS FOR MANUFACTURING POLYNUCLEOTIDES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12420073
Biosensor Tattoos and Uses Therefor for Biomarker Monitoring
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 23, 2025
Patent 12410429
COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR GENE TARGETING USING CRISPR-CAS AND TRANSPOSONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 09, 2025
Patent 12378573
Asparaginase Based Selection System for Heterologous Protein Expression in Mammalian Cells
2y 5m to grant Granted Aug 05, 2025
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
32%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+63.1%)
4y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 19 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