Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/106,166

NUCLEIC ACIDS CONTAINING ABASIC NUCLEOTIDES

Final Rejection §DP
Filed
Feb 06, 2023
Priority
Jan 30, 2021 — provisional 63/143,805 +3 more
Examiner
POLIAKOVA-GEORGAN, EKATERINA
Art Unit
1637
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Tangram Therapeutics PLC
OA Round
4 (Final)
64%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
82%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 64% of resolved cases
64%
Career Allowance Rate
438 granted / 681 resolved
+4.3% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+17.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
65 currently pending
Career history
740
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.8%
-38.2% vs TC avg
§103
40.1%
+0.1% vs TC avg
§102
15.5%
-24.5% vs TC avg
§112
5.9%
-34.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 681 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . 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 1-2, 8-9, 12-14, 42-43, 48-52 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 3, 5-7, 11-13, 15, 19-20, 22-24, 37, 43 of copending Application No. 18/698,235. Claims from '235 recite the same double-stranded RNA (siRNA) comprising abasic nucleotides as in instant claims, which is connected to a ligand attached to 3' terminus of sense strand. Specification from '235 teach the presence of phosphorothioate modifications at the same regions as instantly claimed (see paragraphs [0109-0110] from '235) and that the ligand can be GalNAc (see paragraph [0278] from '235). This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments together with Affidavit, filed 04/20/2026, have been fully considered and are persuasive. The obviousness rejection and double patenting rejections over US Patents 12338438 and 10995336 have been withdrawn. Double patenting rejection over US Application No. 18/106158 is withdrawn in view of the Application abandonment. Double patenting rejection over US Application No. 18/698,235 is maintained for the reasons of record. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 EKATERINA POLIAKOVA whose telephone number is (571)270-5257. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8-5. 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 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. /EKATERINA POLIAKOVA-GEORGANTAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1637
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 4 earlier events
Apr 25, 2025
Final Rejection mailed — §DP
Jun 11, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Aug 25, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Aug 27, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DP
Apr 20, 2026
Response Filed
Apr 20, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 18, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12662676
APTAMER NUCLEIC ACID MOLECULE, AND COMPLEX AND APPLICATION THEREOF
4y 7m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12630827
ANTISENSE OLIGONUCLEOTIDES TARGETING SCN2A FOR THE TREATMENT OF SCN1A ENCEPHALOPATHIES
2y 3m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12618068
Novel Replicase Cycling Reaction (RCR) and the Related SamRNA Designs Thereof
3y 3m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Patent 12605400
OLIGOMERIC NUCLEIC ACID MOLECULE, AND APPLICATION THEREOF IN AN ACUTE INTERMITTENT PORPHYRIA TREATMENT
4y 5m to grant Granted Apr 21, 2026
Patent 12600964
Compound for treatment of heart failure
4y 4m to grant Granted Apr 14, 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

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
64%
Grant Probability
82%
With Interview (+17.6%)
2y 6m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 681 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