Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/238,442

CANNABINOID DOSING REGIME FOR DERMATITIS AND INFLAMMATORY SKIN CONDITIONS

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Aug 25, 2023
Priority
Jan 24, 2018 — provisional 62/621,225 +5 more
Examiner
WARD, PAUL V
Art Unit
1622
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Botanix Pharmaceuticals Limited
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
72%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allowance Rate
1408 granted / 1692 resolved
+23.2% vs TC avg
Minimal -12% lift
Without
With
+-11.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
36 currently pending
Career history
1716
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
29.6%
-10.4% vs TC avg
§102
8.5%
-31.5% vs TC avg
§112
42.9%
+2.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1692 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 CLAIMS: 33-43 are pending in this application. Obviousness-type 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 obviousness-type 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); and 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 a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b). Claims 33-43 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting over claims of prior U.S. Patent No. 11,896,560 (US Application # 16/964,791) since the claims, if allowed, would improperly extend the "right to exclude" already granted in the patent. The subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the patent and is covered by the patent since the patent and the application are claiming common subject matter. The subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the patent and is covered by the patent since the patent and the application are claiming common subject. The claims differ from the reference by reciting specific method of treating than the reference. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to select the methods taught by the reference, including those instantly claimed, because the skilled one would have the reasonable expectation that any of the methods would have similar properties, and thus, the same use as taught for the genus as a whole. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to select the claimed methods from the genus in the reference since such methods would have been suggested by the reference as a whole. Conclusion Claims 33-43 are pending. Claims 33-43 are rejected. No claims are allowed. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL V WARD whose telephone number is (571)272-2909. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am to 5pm. 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, Mark Shibuya can be reached on (571)272-0806. 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. /PAUL V WARD/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1624
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 25, 2023
Application Filed
Jun 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12678384
SANITIZING COMPOSITIONS CONTAINING IONIC LIQUID
3y 6m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12679810
METHOD FOR THE PREPARATION OF SULFINPYRAZONE
3y 3m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12673057
RIPK2 INHIBITION FOR THE TREATMENT OF CANCER
3y 9m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12661432
MULTIFUNCTIONAL, HYDROGEL HYBRID MATERIAL, THE METHOD OF ITS PREPARATION AND THE USE IN THE TREATMENT OF BONE LOSSES
3y 3m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12655141
INHIBITORS OF NOTCH SIGNALING PATHWAY AND USE THEREOF IN TREATMENT OF CANCERS
4y 8m to grant Granted Jun 16, 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
83%
Grant Probability
72%
With Interview (-11.5%)
2y 4m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1692 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