Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 18/232,351

METHOD OF DELIVERING NUCLEIC ACIDS INTO CELLS

Non-Final OA §DOUBLEPATENT
Filed
Aug 09, 2023
Priority
Feb 09, 2021 — CN 202110183415.7 +1 more
Examiner
PACKARD, BENJAMIN J
Art Unit
1612
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Guangzhou Lide Biomedicine Technology Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
66%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1m
Est. Remaining
82%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 66% — above average
66%
Career Allowance Rate
877 granted / 1324 resolved
+6.2% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+15.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
1372
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
65.2%
+25.2% vs TC avg
§102
5.6%
-34.4% vs TC avg
§112
3.0%
-37.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1324 resolved cases

Office Action

§DOUBLEPATENT
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 . Status of the Art The closest prior art has alkyl groups for m4 (see STN compounds), but does not teach the m3 groups instantly claimed, nor is there motivation to modify the core structure to include the various terminal groups instantly claimed. As such, the compounds are free of the prior art. Non Statutory 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 1-16 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims of copending Application No. 18/231,831 (‘831) and 18/322,919 (‘919) (reference applications) in view of US 2009/0099118 (‘118). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because ‘831 and ‘919 are directed to lipids which appear to overlap the lipids used in the instant method (it is noted that the same structures are listed in the dependent claims both in structure form and name). The copending claims do not teach the method of delivering nucleic acids to cells. ‘118 teaches it was known to administer nucleic acids to A549 cells via liposomes for treatment (¶¶ 278, 322, 383, and 395). It would have been obvious to use the lipids of ‘831 and ‘919 to in the methods of ‘118, given they are all lipids for forming liposomal delivery systems. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. Claims 1-16 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over the claims of U.S. Patent No. 12,558,426 (‘426) in view of US 2009/0099118 (‘118). While the claims of ‘426 are directed to a method of delivering proteins via liposomes, ‘118 teaches it was known to administer nucleic acids and proteins to A549 cells via liposomes for treatment (¶¶ 278, 322, 383, and 395). It would have been obvious to use the lipids of ‘426 to in the methods of ‘118, given they are all lipids both utilize liposomal delivery systems to deliver payloads into cells. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN J PACKARD whose telephone number is (571)270-3440. The examiner can normally be reached Mon 2-6pm and Tues-Fri (9am-6pm + mid-day flex). 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, Sahana S. Kaup can be reached at (571) 272-6897. 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. /BENJAMIN J PACKARD/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1612
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 09, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 27, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 01, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DOUBLEPATENT (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12635710
METHODS OF USING FORMALDEHYDE-FREE ANTIMICROBIAL COMPOSITIONS IN ANIMAL BY-PRODUCT COMPOSITIONS
2y 7m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12636252
PROCESS OF PREPARING MRNA-LOADED LIPID NANO PARTICLES
1y 10m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12629458
AGENT TO BE USED IN INTRAOCULAR MEMBRANE DETACHMENT SURGERY
3y 8m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12633435
METHOD FOR THE GRAM-SCALE PREPARATION OF FERRITE NANOPARTICLES FOR MAGNETIC HYPERTHERMIA APPLICATIONS
3y 0m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12616760
SYNTHETIC CYCLIC PEPTIDE MIMETICS
3y 1m to grant Granted May 05, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
66%
Grant Probability
82%
With Interview (+15.8%)
2y 11m (~1m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1324 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