Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/156,793

CONJUGATE OF A TUBULYSIN ANALOG WITH BRANCHED LINKERS

Final Rejection §112§DP
Filed
Jan 19, 2023
Examiner
SABILA, MERCY HELLEN
Art Unit
1654
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Hangzhou Dac Biotech Co., LTD.
OA Round
2 (Final)
59%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 59% of resolved cases
59%
Career Allow Rate
152 granted / 257 resolved
-0.9% vs TC avg
Strong +46% interview lift
Without
With
+45.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
56 currently pending
Career history
313
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.2%
-36.8% vs TC avg
§103
41.9%
+1.9% vs TC avg
§102
15.9%
-24.1% vs TC avg
§112
20.8%
-19.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 257 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 is a DIV of 16/759,175 filed on 04/24/2020 now Patent number 11998584. 16/759,175 is a 371 of PCT/CN2017/120454 filed on 12/31/2017. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements submitted on 08/08/2025 and 10/09/2025 have been considered by the examiner. Claim Status Claims 1-17 are pending. Claim 1 is amended. Claims 9-17 are new. Claims 1-17 are being examined on the merits in this office action. Claim Rejections - Withdrawn The rejection of claims 1-8 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao et al. (WO2014009774A1 – hereinafter “Zhao”) in view of the claim amendments and arguments. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 – Maintained 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 1-17 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. MPEP § 2137 states that "the written description requirement for a genus must 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 i)(C), above). See Eli Lilly, 119 F.3d at 1568, 43 USPQ2d at 1406. For written description, the analysis (a) considers actual reduction to practice, (b) disclosure of drawings or structural chemical formulas, (c) sufficient relevant identifying characteristics in the way of complete/partial structure or physical and/or chemical properties, functional characteristics when coupled with known or disclosed and (d) representative number of examples. Actual reduction to practice and (b) disclosure of drawings or structural chemical formulas: The instant claims recite a side chain-linkage compound of Formula (IV), which can readily react to a cell-binding molecule T to form a conjugate: PNG media_image1.png 207 738 media_image1.png Greyscale wherein “ PNG media_image2.png 25 58 media_image2.png Greyscale ” represents a single bond; L1 and L2 are, the same or different, independently selected from O, NH, N, S, N(R3), N(R3)N(R3′), CH, CO, C(O)NH, C(O)O, polyethyleneoxy unit of formula (OCH2CH2)pOR3, or (OCH2CH—(CH3))pOR3, or NH(CH2CH2O)pR3, or NH(CH2CH(CH3)O)pR3, or N[(CH2CH2O)pR3], [(CH2CH2O)pR3′], or (OCH2CH2)pCOOR3, or CH2CH2(OCH2CH2)pCOOR3, wherein p and p′ are independently an integer selected from 0 to about 1000, or a combination of two or more thereof; C1-C8 alkyl; C2-C8 heteroalkyl, alkylcarbonyl, or heteroaryl; or (Aa)r, r=1-12 (1 to 12 amino acid units), which is composed from natural or unnatural amino acids, or the same or different sequences of dipeptide, tripeptide, tetrapeptide, pentapeptide, hexapeptide, heptapeptide, octapeptide, nonapeptide, decapeptide, undecapeptide or dodecapeptide unit; W is a stretcher unit having C1-C18, and is a peptidic unit, a disulfide, an ester, or an amide bond; w is 1 or 2 or 3; V1 and V2 are independently a spacer unit and selected from NH, C1-C8 alkyl, alkylcarbonyl, or (Aa)r, r=1-12 (1 to 12 amino acid units), which is composed from a natural or unnatural amino acid, or the same or different sequences of dipeptide, tripeptide, tetrapeptide, pentapeptide, hexapeptide, heptapeptide, octapeptide, nonapeptide, decapeptide, undecapeptide or dodecapeptide unit; or (CH2CH2O)p, p is 0-1000; and v1 and v2 are independently 0, 1 or 2, but v1 and v2 are not 0 at the same time; when v1 or v2 is 0, one of the side chain Q1 or Q2 fragment is absent; Q1 and Q2 are independently represented by Formula (I-q1): PNG media_image3.png 282 893 media_image3.png Greyscale wherein PNG media_image4.png 33 75 media_image4.png Greyscale is a site linked to L1 or L2; G1 and G2 are independently OC(O), NHC(O), C(O), CH2, NH, OC(O)NH, NHC(O)NH, O, Ar, ArCH2, ArO, ArNH, ArS, ArNR1, or (Aa)q1; G3 is OH, SH, OR1, SR1, OC(O)R1, NHC(O)R1, C(O)R1, CH3, NH2, NR1, +NH(R1), +N(R1)(R2), C(O)OH, C(O)NH2, NHC(O)NH2, S(O)2(OH), (CH2)q1C(O)OH, (CH2)q1P(O)(OH)2, C(O)(CH2)q1C(O)OH, OC(O)(CH2)q1C(O)OH, NHC(O)(CH2)q1C(O)OH, CO(CH2)q1P(O)(OH)2, NHC(O)O(CH2)q1C(O)OH, OC(O)NH(CH2)q1C(O)OH, NHCO(CH2)q1P(O)(OH)2, NHC(O)(NH)(CH2)q1C(O)OH, Ar, ArR1, ArOH, ArNH2, ArSH, ArNHR1, or (Aa)q1; (Aa)q1 is a peptide containing the same or different sequence of natural or unnatural amino acids; X1 and X2 are independently O, CH2, S, S(O), NHNH, NH, N(R1), +NH(R1), +N(R1)(R2), C(O), OC(O), OC(O)O, OC(O)NH, or NHC(O)NH; Y2 is O, NH, NR1, CH2, S, NHNH, or Ar; p1, p2 and p3 are independently 0-100 but are not 0 at the same time; q1 and q2 are independently 0-24; R1, R2, R3 and R3′ are independently H, C1-C8 alkyl; C2-C8 heteroalkyl, or heterocyclic; C3-C8 aryl, Ar-alkyl, cycloalkyl, alkylcycloalkyl, heterocycloalkyl, heteroalkylcycloalkyl, carbocyclic, or alkylcarbonyl; alternatively, any one or more of W, Q1, Q2, L1, L2, V1, or V2 can be independently absent but Q1 and Q2 are not absent at the same time; D is tubulysin analog having following formula (II): PNG media_image5.png 443 1300 media_image5.png Greyscale or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt, hydrate, or hydrated salt; or a polymorphic crystalline structure; or an optical isomer, racemate, diastereomer or enantiomer thereof, wherein ----- is a linkage site that links to W independently; wherein R1, R2, R3, and R4 are independently H, C1-C8 alkyl; C2-C8 heteroalkyl, or heterocyclic; C3-C8 aryl, Ar-alkyl, cycloalkyl, alkylcycloalkyl, heterocycloalkyl, heteroalkylcycloalkyl, carbocyclic, or alkylcarbonyl; or R1 and R2, R1 and R3, R2 and R3, R3 and R4, R5 and R6, R11 and R12, or R13 and R14 form a 3-7 membered carbocyclic, cycloalkyl, heterocyclic, heterocycloalkyl, aromatic or heteroaromatic ring system; R1 and R2 can be independently absent when they link to W independently or simultaneously, Y1 is N or CH; wherein R5, R6, R8, R10 and R11 are independently H, or C1-C4 alkyl or heteroalkyl; wherein R7 is independently H, R14, —R14C(═O)X1R15; or —R14X1R15; X1 is O, S, S—S, NH, CH2 or NR14; wherein R9 is selected from H, OH, —O—, ═O, —OR14, —OC(═O)R14, —OC(═O)NHR14—, —OC(═O)R14SSR15—, OP(═O)(OR14)—, —OC(═O)NR14R15, OP(═O)(OR14), or OR140P(═O)(OR15); wherein R11 is independently H, R14, —R14C(═O)R16, —R14X2R16, —R14C(═O)X2, wherein X2 is —O—, —S—, —NH—, —N(R14)—, —O—R14—, —S—R14—, —S(═O)—R14—, or —NHR14; wherein R12 is R15, —OH, —SH, —NH2, NH, NHNH2, —NH(R15), —OR15, —R15COR16, R15COOR16, —R15C(O)NH2, —R15C(O)NHR17, —SR16, R15S(═O)R16, —R15P(═O)(OR17)2, —R15OP(═O)(OR17)2, —CH2OP(═O)(OR17)2, —R15SO2R17, —R15X2R16, —R15C(═O)X2, where X2 is —O—OH, SH, —S—, NH2, —NH—, —N(R15)—, —O—R15—, —S—R15—, —S(═O)—R15—, CH2 or —NHR5—; R13 and R14 are independently H, O, S, NH, N(R15), NHNH, —OH, —SH, —NH2, NH, NHNH2, —NH(R15), —OR15, CO, —COX2, —COX2R16, R17, F, Cl, Br, I, SR16, NR16R17, N═NR16, N═R16, NO2, SOR16R17, SO2R16, SO3R16, PR16, PR16R17, POR16R17, PO2R16R17, OP(O)(OR17)2, OCH2OP(O)(OR17)2, OC(O)R17, OC(O)OP(O)(OR17)2, PO(OR16)(OR17), OP(O)(OR17)OP(O)(OR17)2, OC(O)NHR17, —O—(C4-C12 glycoside), —N—(C4-C12 glycoside); C1-C8 alkyl or heteroalkyl; C2-C8 alkenyl, alkynyl, heteroalkyl, or heterocycloalkyl; C3-C8 aryl, Ar-alkyl, carbocyclic, cycloalkyl, heteroalkylcycloalkyl, alkylcarbonyl, or heteroaryl, or C2-C8 ester, ether, or amide; or peptide containing 1-8 amino acids (NH(Aa)1-8 or CO(Aa)i-s (N-terminal or C-terminal 1-8 same or different amino acids), or polyethyleneoxy unit of formula (OCH2CH2)p or (OCH2CH(CH3))p, wherein p is an integer from 0 to about 1000, or a combination of two or more thereof; X2 is O, S, S—S, NH, CH2, OH, SH, NH2, CHR14 or NR14; R15, R16 and R17 are independently H, C1-C8 alkyl or heteroalkyl; C2-C8 alkenyl, alkynyl, heteroalkyl, or heterocycloalkyl; C3-C8 aryl, Ar-alkyl, carbocyclic, cycloalkyl, heteroalkylcycloalkyl, alkylcarbonyl, heteroaryl, or alkylcarbonyl, or Na+, K+, Cs+, Li+, Ca2+, Mg+, Zn2+, N+(R1)(R2)(R3)(R4), or HN+(C2H5OH)3 salt; Y1 and Y2 are independently N or CH; q is 0 or 1; when q=0, Y3 does not exist, Y4, Y5, Y6 and Y7 are independently CH, N, NH, O, S, or N(R′), thus Y2, Y4, YS, Y6 and Y7form a heteroaromatic ring of furan, pyrrole thiophene, thiazole, oxazole, imidazole, pyrazole, triazole, tetrazole, or thiadiazole; when q=1, Y3, Y4, Y5, Y6 and Y7 are independently CH or N, thus Y2, Y3, Y4, Y5, Y6 and Y7 form an aromatic ring of benzene, pyridine, pyridazine, pyrimidine, pyrazine, triazine, tetrazine, or pentazine; LV1 is a reacting group that can be reacted with a thiol, amine, carboxylic acid, selenol, phenol or hydroxyl group on a cell-binding molecule; LV1 is selected from OH; F; Cl; Br; I; nitrophenol; N-hydroxysuccinimide (NHS); phenol; dinitrophenol; pentafluorophenol; tetrafluorophenol; difluorophenol; mono-fluorophenol; pentachlorophenol; triflate; imidazole; dichlorophenol; tetrachlorophenol; 1-hydroxybenzotriazole; tosylate; mesylate; 2-ethyl-5-phenylisoxazolium-3′-sulfonate, anhydride formed by an acid itself, or formed with another anhydride; or an intermediate molecule generated with a condensation reagent for peptide coupling reactions, or for Mitsunobu reactions; the condensation reagent is selected from: EDC (N-(3-dimethylaminopropyl)-N′-ethylcarbodiimide), DCC (dicyclohexyl-carbodiimide), N,N′-diisopropylcarbodiimide (DIC), N-cyclohexyl-N′-(2-morpholino-ethyl)carbodiimide metho-p-toluenesulfonate (CMC, or CME-CDI), 1,1′-carbonyldiimi-dazole (CDI), TBTU (0-(benzotriazol-1-yl)-N,N,N′,N′-tetramethyluronium tetrafluoroborate), N,N,N′,N′-tetramethyl-O-(1H-benzo-triazol-1-yl)-uronium hexafluoro-phosphate (HBTU), (benzotriazol-1-yloxy)tris(dimethylamino)-phosphonium hexafluorophosphate (BOP), (benzotriazol-1-yloxy)tripyrrolidinophosphonium hexafluorophosphate (PyBOP), diethyl cyanophosphonate (DEPC), chloro-N,N,N′,N′-tetra-methylformamidiniumhexafluorophosphate, 1-[bis(dimethylamino)methylene]-1H-1,2,3-triazolo[4,5-b]pyridinium 3-oxid hexafluorophosphate (HATU), 1-[(dimethylamino)-(morpholino)methylene]-1H-[1,2,3]triazolo[4,5-b]pyridine-1-ium 3-oxide hexafluoro-phosphate (HDMA), 2-chloro-1,3-dimethyl-imidazolidinium hexafluorophosphate (CIP), chlorotripyrrolidinophosphonium hexafluorophosphate (PyCloP), fluoro-N,N,N′,N′-bis(tetramethylene)-formamidinium hexafluorophosphate (BTFFH), N,N,N′,N′-tetramethyl-S-(1-oxido-2-pyridyl)thiuronium hexafluorophosphate, O-(2-oxo-1(2H)pyridyl)-N,N,N′,N′-tetramethyluronium tetrafluoroborate (TPTU), S-(1-oxido-2-pyridyl)-N,N,N′,N′-tetramethylthiuronium tetrafluoroborate, O-[(ethoxycarbonyl)-cyanomethylenamino]-N,N,N′,N′-tetramethyluronium hexafluorophosphate (HOTU), (1-cyano-2-ethoxy-2-oxoethylidenaminooxy) dimethylamino-morpholino-carbenium hexafluorophosphate (COMU), O-(benzotriazol-1-yl)-N,N,N′,N′-bis(tetramethylene)-uronium hexafluorophosphate (HBPyU), N-benzyl-N′-cyclohexyl-carbodiimide (with, or without polymer-bound), dipyrrolidino(N-succinimidyl-oxy)carbenium hexafluoro-phosphate (HSPyU), chlorodipyrrolidinocarbenium hexafluorophosphate (PyClU), 2-chloro-1,3-dimethylimidazoli-dinium tetrafluoroborate(CIB), (benzotriazol-1-yloxy)dipiperidino-carbenium hexafluorophosphate (HBPipU), 0-(6-chlorobenzotriazol-1-yl)-N,N,N′,N′-tetramethyluronium tetrafluoroborate (TCTU), bromotris(dimethylamino)-phosphonium hexafluorophosphate (BroP), propylphosphonic anhydride (PPACA, T3P©), 2-morpholinoethyl isocyanide (MEI), N,N,N′,N′-tetramethyl-O—(N-succinimidyl)uronium hexafluorophosphate (HSTU), 2-bromo-1-ethyl-pyridinium tetrafluoroborate (BEP), O-[(ethoxycarbonyl)cyano-methylenamino]-N,N,N′,N′-tetramethyluronium tetrafluoroborate (TOTU), 4-(4,6-dimethoxy-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)-4-methylmorpholiniumchloride (MMTM, DMTMM), N,N,N′,N′-tetramethyl-O—(N-succinimidyl)uronium tetrafluoroborate (TSTU), O-(3,4-dihydro-4-oxo-1,2,3-benzotriazin-3-yl)-N,N,N′,N′-tetramethyluronium tetrafluoro-borate (TDBTU),1,1′-(azodicarbonyl)-dipiperidine (ADD), di-(4-chlorobenzyl)azodicarboxylate (DCAD), di-tert-butyl azodicarboxylate (DBAD), diisopropyl azodicarboxylate (DIAD), diethyl azodicarboxylate (DEAD) Applicant has reduced to practice the compounds recited in claim 8 and the compounds are limited to D (tubulysin) being PNG media_image6.png 195 470 media_image6.png Greyscale The compounds reduced to practice have different linkers. Examiner notes that the instant claims currently recite the compound of Formula IV with a laundry list of possible groups or variables and the claims are not a representation of any particular species. Written description issues may also arise if the knowledge and level of skill in the art would not have permitted the ordinary artisan to immediately envisage the claimed product arising 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 necessarily 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) (See MPEP 2162.1 (A). sufficient relevant identifying characteristics in the way of complete/partial structure or physical and/or chemical properties A correlation between structure and function, for the instantly claimed genus of compounds, is not disclosed in the specification. Examiner notes that the species disclosed in the instant application comprise a similar tubulysin structure linked to a monoclonal antibody or reacting group using different types of linkers. The instant claims however, list numerous variables or functional groups that could be attached to the compound leading to the numerous types of linkers and thus numerous compounds. Thus, the instant claims are not limited to a particular structure given the variability of the linkers that could be generated. Representative number of examples A “representative number of species” means the species which are adequately described are a representative of the entire genus. Therefore, when there is a substantial variation within a genus, the applicant 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]." See Enzo Biochem, 323 F.3d at 966, 63 USPQ2d at 1615; Noelle v. Lederman, 355 F.3d 1343, 1350, 69 USPQ2d 1508, 1514 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (Fed. Cir. 2004) ("[A] patentee of a biotechnological invention cannot necessarily claim a genus after only describing a limited number of species because there may be unpredictability in the results obtained from species other than those specifically enumerated."). See MPEP 2163.3 (ii). The elected species and the compounds recited in the application specification are not a representation of the entire genus recited in the claims. The instant Examples are focused on producing the compounds that all have the same tubulysin structure, linker and a monoclonal antibody or reacting group. The Examples do not disclose the numerous linkers that could be generated from all the variables recited in the instant Formula IV. Further, the Examples do not disclose the numerous linkers linked to the numerous reacting groups recited in the instant claims. Thus, the specification fails to provide adequate written description for the genus of compounds claimed and does not reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the entire scope of the claimed invention. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 09/30/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the claims were amended to redefine W, Q1, Q2, , L1, L2, V1, V2, LV1. Examiner notes that the amendments do not overcome the written description rejection. Applicant has reduced to practice the compounds recited in claim 8 and the compounds are limited to D (tubulysin) being PNG media_image6.png 195 470 media_image6.png Greyscale The compounds reduced to practice have different linkers. Examiner notes that the instant claims currently recite the compound of Formula IV with a laundry list of possible groups or variables and the claims are not a representation of any particular species. Written description issues may also arise if the knowledge and level of skill in the art would not have permitted the ordinary artisan to immediately envisage the claimed product arising 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 necessarily 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) (See MPEP 2162.1 (A). The instant Examples are focused on producing the compounds that all have the same tubulysin structure, linker and a monoclonal antibody or reacting group. The Examples do not disclose the numerous linkers that could be generated from all the variables recited in the instant Formula IV. Further, the Examples do not disclose the numerous linkers linked to the numerous reacting groups recited in the instant claims. Thus, the specification fails to provide adequate written description for the genus of compounds claimed and does not reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the entire scope of the claimed invention. Double Patenting - Maintained 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, 5-6 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-13 of U.S. Patent No. US10399941B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the patent recite a side chain-linkaged conjugate compound of the Formula (I): PNG media_image7.png 551 629 media_image7.png Greyscale (claim 1), wherein the conjugate has the structure PNG media_image8.png 190 773 media_image8.png Greyscale (claims 2-3), and the structure PNG media_image9.png 186 742 media_image9.png Greyscale (claim 5). The instant claims recite a side chain-linkage compound of Formula (IV), which can readily react to a cell-binding molecule T to form a conjugate: PNG media_image1.png 207 738 media_image1.png Greyscale Q1 and Q2 are independently represented by Formula (I-q1): PNG media_image3.png 282 893 media_image3.png Greyscale D is tubulysin analog having following formula (II): PNG media_image5.png 443 1300 media_image5.png Greyscale or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt, hydrate, or hydrated salt; or a polymorphic crystalline structure; or an optical isomer, racemate, diastereomer or enantiomer. The claims of the patent anticipate the instant claims. Regarding claims 2 and 5, the claims of the patent recite wherein the conjugate comprises PNG media_image9.png 186 742 media_image9.png Greyscale (claim 5) which comprises maleimide and comprises the instant tubulysin. Regarding claim 6, the claims of the patent recite wherein the conjugate comprises PNG media_image10.png 227 697 media_image10.png Greyscale (claim 13), which comprises the instant 3rd structure. Claims 1-17 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 27-35 of copending Application No. 18/706,734. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the copending application recite a compound drug linker complex that comprises the formula PNG media_image11.png 51 241 media_image11.png Greyscale or PNG media_image12.png 99 264 media_image12.png Greyscale wherein LV1 and LV2 is PNG media_image13.png 155 496 media_image13.png Greyscale and linkers such as PNG media_image14.png 206 1005 media_image14.png Greyscale (claim 27) that is attached to a monoclonal antibody (claim 28-31) and wherein the drugs are PEG (claim 32), wherein the tubulysin analog PNG media_image15.png 216 788 media_image15.png Greyscale specifically, PNG media_image16.png 142 655 media_image16.png Greyscale (claim 33). The instant claims recite a side chain-linkage compound of Formula (IV), which can readily react to a cell-binding molecule T to form a conjugate: PNG media_image1.png 207 738 media_image1.png Greyscale Q1 and Q2 are independently represented by Formula (I-q1): PNG media_image3.png 282 893 media_image3.png Greyscale D is tubulysin analog having following formula (II): PNG media_image5.png 443 1300 media_image5.png Greyscale or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt, hydrate, or hydrated salt; or a polymorphic crystalline structure; or an optical isomer, racemate, diastereomer or enantiomer. The claims of the copending application anticipate the instant claims. Regarding claims 2-7, claims of the copending application recite a compound drug linker complex that comprises the formula PNG media_image11.png 51 241 media_image11.png Greyscale or PNG media_image12.png 99 264 media_image12.png Greyscale wherein LV1 and LV2 is PNG media_image13.png 155 496 media_image13.png Greyscale and linkers such as PNG media_image14.png 206 1005 media_image14.png Greyscale (claim 27) that is attached to a monoclonal antibody (claim 28-31) and wherein the drugs are PEG (claim 32), wherein the tubulysin analog PNG media_image15.png 216 788 media_image15.png Greyscale specifically, PNG media_image16.png 142 655 media_image16.png Greyscale (claim 33). Regarding claim 8, the claims of the copending application teaches compounds such as PNG media_image17.png 247 1057 media_image17.png Greyscale (claim 35). Regarding claim 9, the claims of the copending application recite that the variables can be C1-C8 alkyl, or the structures below PNG media_image18.png 565 787 media_image18.png Greyscale (claim 27). Regarding claims 12-17, the claims of the copending application recite PNG media_image19.png 201 796 media_image19.png Greyscale PNG media_image20.png 265 1107 media_image20.png Greyscale PNG media_image21.png 471 973 media_image21.png Greyscale Claims 1-8 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 41-44, 46-52 of copending Application No. 18/706,736. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the copending application recite an antibody drug conjugate comprising the tubulysin analog PNG media_image22.png 150 548 media_image22.png Greyscale PNG media_image23.png 312 827 media_image23.png Greyscale (claims 41-42). That the conjugate comprises the linker such as PNG media_image24.png 145 816 media_image24.png Greyscale and PNG media_image25.png 221 781 media_image25.png Greyscale (claim 43-44, 46-52). The instant claims recite a side chain-linkage compound of Formula (IV), which can readily react to a cell-binding molecule T to form a conjugate: PNG media_image1.png 207 738 media_image1.png Greyscale Q1 and Q2 are independently represented by Formula (I-q1): PNG media_image3.png 282 893 media_image3.png Greyscale D is tubulysin analog having following formula (II): PNG media_image5.png 443 1300 media_image5.png Greyscale or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt, hydrate, or hydrated salt; or a polymorphic crystalline structure; or an optical isomer, racemate, diastereomer or enantiomer. The claims of the copending application anticipate the instant claims. Regarding claims 2-8, claims of the copending application recite a compound drug linker complex that comprises the formula PNG media_image11.png 51 241 media_image11.png Greyscale or PNG media_image12.png 99 264 media_image12.png Greyscale wherein LV1 and LV2 is PNG media_image13.png 155 496 media_image13.png Greyscale and linkers such as PNG media_image14.png 206 1005 media_image14.png Greyscale (claims 43-44), wherein the tubulysin analog PNG media_image22.png 150 548 media_image22.png Greyscale (claim 41-42). Claims 1-8 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 24-28, 31-34 of copending Application No. 18/706,741. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the copending application recite a drug-linker complex of the formula PNG media_image26.png 77 427 media_image26.png Greyscale wherein LV1 and LV2 include PNG media_image27.png 112 188 media_image27.png Greyscale wherein the linker includes PNG media_image28.png 150 842 media_image28.png Greyscale or PNG media_image29.png 92 641 media_image29.png Greyscale (claim 24-28), wherein the tubulysin analog includes PNG media_image30.png 131 625 media_image30.png Greyscale (claim 31-34). The instant claims recite a side chain-linkage compound of Formula (IV), which can readily react to a cell-binding molecule T to form a conjugate: PNG media_image1.png 207 738 media_image1.png Greyscale Q1 and Q2 are independently represented by Formula (I-q1): PNG media_image3.png 282 893 media_image3.png Greyscale D is tubulysin analog having following formula (II): PNG media_image5.png 443 1300 media_image5.png Greyscale or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt, hydrate, or hydrated salt; or a polymorphic crystalline structure; or an optical isomer, racemate, diastereomer or enantiomer. The claims of the copending application anticipate the instant claims. Regarding claims 2-8, claims of the copending application recite a compound drug linker complex that comprises the formula PNG media_image11.png 51 241 media_image11.png Greyscale or PNG media_image12.png 99 264 media_image12.png Greyscale wherein LV1 and LV2 is PNG media_image13.png 155 496 media_image13.png Greyscale and linkers such as PNG media_image14.png 206 1005 media_image14.png Greyscale (claims 24-28), wherein the tubulysin analog PNG media_image22.png 150 548 media_image22.png Greyscale (claim 31-34). This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. Response to Arguments Applicant's argument has been fully considered but is not found persuasive because only compliance with objections or requirements as to form not necessary for further consideration of the claims may be held in abeyance until allowable subject matter is indicated. MPEP §804. Therefore, the nonstatutory double patenting rejections are maintained. Conclusion No claims are allowed. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 Mercy H. Sabila whose telephone number is (571)272-2562. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 5:00 am - 3:00 pm. 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, Lianko G. Garyu can be reached at (571)270-7367. 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. /MERCY H SABILA/Examiner, Art Unit 1654 /LIANKO G GARYU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1654
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 19, 2023
Application Filed
Jun 27, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112, §DP
Sep 30, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 06, 2026
Final Rejection — §112, §DP
Apr 02, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595286
FUCOSE-BINDING PROTEIN, METHOD FOR PRODUCING SAME, AND USE OF SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12577282
GALECTIN-1/ GALECTIN-3 CHIMERAS AND MULTIVALENT PROTEINS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12565516
CARRIER PROTEIN FOR IMPROVING PROPERTIES OF BIOACTIVE PROTEIN
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12534514
BIOLOGICAL AND SYNTHETIC MOLECULES INHIBITING RESPIRATORY SYNCYTIAL VIRUS INFECTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12528839
CONJUGATED VIRUS-LIKE PARTICLES AND USES THEREOF AS ANTI-TUMOR IMMUNE REDIRECTORS
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
59%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+45.7%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 257 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month