DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-16, 18-19 and 22-23, submitted 19 November 2025, are pending in the application. Claims 13-14, 18-19, and 22-23 are withdrawn. Claims 1-12 and 15-16 are under examination in the instant Office 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 .
Rejections – Withdrawn and New
The status of the previously rejected claimed in the Office Action males 17 December 2025 are set out below.
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 102
The Applicant’s amendments and arguments are sufficient to overcome the previous rejection.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 3-7 of the Applicant Arguments/Remarks, filed 11 February 2026, with respect to 35 U.S.C. § 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 1-12 and 15-16 has been withdrawn.
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.
New - Claim 16 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.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 16 recites the broad recitation “wherein the other drug is a chemotherapy drug or a targeted drug”, and the claim also recites “preferably, the targeted drug is one or more of COX-2 inhibitors, DPP4 inhibitors, CSF-1α inhibitors, or A2a antagonist” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-12 and 15 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the instantly claimed invention is deemed novel and unobvious over the prior art.
The closest prior art is Wang et al. (USPN 11,078,192), which teaches a compound similar to that of the Applicants, shown below.
Compound 9 taught by Wang
PNG
media_image1.png
182
411
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(Col. 161, 2nd compound)
Compound 70 taught by Applicant
PNG
media_image2.png
144
279
media_image2.png
Greyscale
However, this reference teaches compounds which are 3,4,5-trisubstituted and neither teach nor render obvious compounds which are 2,4,5-trisubstituted which would result in compounds similar to that of the instantly claimed invention. Additionally, the compounds of the instantly claimed invention possess unexpected results of greater pharmacokinetic properties.
Therefore, the prior art neither anticipates nor reasonably makes obvious the instantly claimed invention. Thus, the claimed invention is deemed novel and unobvious over the prior art.
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 1-12 and 15 are allowed. Claim 16 is rejected.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN CHRISTOPHER SANCHEZ whose telephone number is (703)756-5336. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Friday (0730-1700).
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, James H Alstrum-Acevedo can be reached at 571-272-5548. 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.
JUSTIN CHRISTOPHER SANCHEZ
Examiner
Art Unit 1622
/J.C.S./Examiner, Art Unit 1622
/JAMES H ALSTRUM-ACEVEDO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1622
Prosecution Insights