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 .
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 6/03/26 has been entered.
Non-Final Rejection
The Status of Claims:
Claims 1, and 3-9 are pending.
Claims 1, 3-7 and 9 are rejected.
Claim 8 is allowable.
DETAILED ACTION
1. Claims 1, 3-9 are under consideration in this Office Action.
Priority
2. It is noted that this application is a continuation of PCT/CN2022/111333 08/10/2022 , which has a foreign priority document CHINA CN202210379030.2 04/12/2022 .
Drawings
3. The drawings filed on 7/25/23 are accepted by the examiner.
IDS
4. None.
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 1,3-7 and 9 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
In claim 1, the phrase “ A method for preparing an antihistamine composition or a drug for treating pneumonia, comprising using aristolochic acid Iva” is recited. This expression can be confusing because this is a hybrid claim of combining a method of preparation claim and a method of treatment claim. The examiner recommends to separate each into two different claims.
In claim 1, the phrase “ A method for preparing an antihistamine composition” is recited. This can be indefinite because the claim does not elaborate how an antihistamine composition can be prepared in steps. The examiner recommends to put the specific steps for preparing the antihistamine composition in the claim
In claim 9, the phrase “ A drug containing an active ingredient aristolochic acid
IVa or the drug is used for treating pneumonia” is recited. This expression can be confusing because this is a hybrid claim of combining a compound claim or a composition claim and a method for the treatment claim. The examiner recommends to separate each into two different claims.
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.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated clearly by Aruna et al (International Journal of Pharmacy and Biological Sciences-IJPBSTM (2019) 9 (3): 615-621).
Aruna et al discloses the potential ligand candidates such as Aristolochic acid A, Aristolochic acid B, Aristolochic acid C, Aristolochic acid D and Aristolochic acid E. Lipinski rule was employed to check the ligand likeliness of the compound. Among them, it concluded that aristolochic acid B as a potent inhibitor drug for lung cancer (see page 615, abstract). From the above teachings, it follows that the claimed compound, Aristolochic acid D can be a potential drug for treating lung cancer to a degree due to a similar core structure between aristolochic acid B and aristolochic acid D. This is inherently identical with the claim.
Conclusion
Claims 1, 3-7 and 9 are rejected.
Claim 8 is allowable.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAYLOR V OH whose telephone number is (571)272-0689. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-5:00.
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, Andrew Kosar can be reached at 571-272-0913. 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.
/TAYLOR V OH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1625 6/10/2026
Prosecution Insights