Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/256,138

INTRACELLULAR ATP ENHANCER

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Jun 06, 2023
Examiner
PATEL, SAGAR S
Art Unit
1626
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Nippon Chemiphar Co., LTD.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
345 granted / 455 resolved
+15.8% vs TC avg
Strong +34% interview lift
Without
With
+33.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
30 currently pending
Career history
485
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.0%
-39.0% vs TC avg
§103
32.8%
-7.2% vs TC avg
§102
20.7%
-19.3% vs TC avg
§112
23.6%
-16.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 455 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. Status of the Claims Claims 1 and 28 – 56 are pending. Claims 36 – 38 and 40 are rejected. Claims 1, 28 – 35, 39 and 41 – 56 are withdrawn. Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II, claims 29 – 56, in the reply filed on November 14, 2025 is acknowledged. Applicant further specifically elected the compound 2-(3-cyano-4-phenoxyphenyl)-7-hydroxythiazolo[5,4-d]pyrimidine in claim 56. The compound is presented below: PNG media_image1.png 146 328 media_image1.png Greyscale . The compound reads on the structure of General Formula (I): PNG media_image2.png 182 426 media_image2.png Greyscale , wherein: R1 represents an unsubstituted phenyl group, R2 represents a cyano group, R3 represents a hydrogen atom, X represents an oxygen atom, and Y represents a sulfur atom. Applicant further elected a method for treatment or prevention of retinitis pigmentosa as the single method of use of the pharmaceutical composition comprising the compound represented by General Formula (I). Examination: Claims 36 – 38 and 40 read on the elected species. The elected species of the compound and the method are no allowable. Examination of the Markush-type claim has not been extended to include the scope of non-elected species. Claims 1, 28 – 35, 39 and 41 – 56 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention/ species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Priority PNG media_image3.png 88 382 media_image3.png Greyscale Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on June 6, 2023, October 9, 2024 and April 28, 2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner. Claim Objections Claim 36 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 36 is directed a method for treatment or prevention of an ATP-related eye disease, comprising an effective amount of the pharmaceutical composition according to claim 1 to a subject in need thereof. Claim 36 is directed to a different group of invention compared to the invention of claim 1. Applicant is requested to recite claim 36 in independent form and incorporate all limitations of the pharmaceutical composition comprising the compound represented by General Formula (I). Appropriate correction is required. 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. Claim 38 is 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 38 recites the broad recitations: a retinal degenerative disease (page 4, line 7 of the claim), demyelinating optic neuropathy disease (page 5, line 6), and toxic optic neuropathy (page 5, line 6). The claim also recites the limitations: “including a drug-induced (including chloroquine) retinal disorder” (page 4, lines 7-8 of the claim), “(including multiple sclerosis)” (page 5, line 6), and “(including ethambutol, methanol, and thinner)” (page 5, lines 6-7), which is the narrower statements of the range/limitation. The claim is considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims. In order to overcome the rejection, Applicant may amend to delete all of the narrower limitations in the claim. 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 38 – 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yoshida et al. WO 2019/208635 A1 (publ. October 31, 2019; effect. filed April 27, 2018), as cited in IDS dated June 6, 2023, evidenced by English translation of WO 2019/208635 A1, Retrieved on January 23, 2026. Yoshida et al. teach compound 6. See, Table 1, page 17. Compound 6 is presented below: PNG media_image4.png 158 395 media_image4.png Greyscale . Yoshida et al. also teach pharmaceutical compositions comprising said compound, a tautomer, a stereoisomer, or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof, and a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier. See attached English translation, e.g., paragraph [0009], page 9, lines 4-12. The pharmaceutical composition can be formulated for parenteral administration or oral administration in solid or liquid form to humans. See, e.g., paragraph [0030], page 21. The compound exhibits high xanthine oxidase inhibitory activity and excellent metabolic stability. See, e.g., paragraph [0006], page 5. Yoshida further teaches methods for using the composition for the treatment and prevention of chronic kidney diseases. See., e.g., paragraph [0010]. The prior art anticipates the instant claims as presented below: With respect to Claims 36 – 38, the limitation “for treatment or prevention of an ATP-related eye disease” is an intended use limitation as governed by MPEP §2111.02(II). Intended use limitations are interpreted based on the structural limitations they impart to the invention. In this case, the intended use only requires the method comprising administering an effective amount of the pharmaceutical composition comprising the compound represented by General Formula (I) for treatment or prevention of an ATP-related eye disease, specifically retinitis pigmentosa, but does not impart any specific limitations to the structure. Based on the teachings of Yoshida et al, an effective amount of the pharmaceutical composition comprising compound 6 is capable of being administered in the method for treatment of prevention of retinitis pigmentosa to a subject in need thereof. Compound 6 in Yoshida reads on the structure of General Formula (I): PNG media_image2.png 182 426 media_image2.png Greyscale , wherein: R1 represents an unsubstituted phenyl group, R2 represents a cyano group, R3 represents a hydrogen atom, X represents an oxygen atom, and Y represents a sulfur atom. With respect to Claim 40, Yoshida et al. also teach the dosage of the pharmaceutical composition comprising the compound for adults is 0.1 μg to 10 g/day, preferably 0.001 to 2000 mg/day, when administered orally and can be adjusted depending on age and symptoms. See, e.g., paragraph [0036]. The disclosed range encompasses the claimed range of 10 to 320 mg per day. Yoshida also teaches in vitro inhibitory activity (IC50) of compound 6 against bovine milk-derived xanthine oxidase. See, e.g., paragraph [0052], Table 2. The activity is presented below: PNG media_image5.png 96 528 media_image5.png Greyscale . “… [t]he test compound was dissolved in dimethyl sulfoxide and then diluted with 50 mmol/L phosphate buffer (pH 7.5) to prepare a solution of the specified concentration… 125 μL of test compound solutions prepared at various concentrations was added to 1 mL of 250 μmol/L Xanthine (Sigma-Aldrich) solution prepared in 50 mmol/L phosphate buffer (pH 7.5), and the mixture was pre-incubated at 30 °C for 5 minutes”. See, paragraph [0052], Test Example 1. Thus, the pharmaceutical composition comprising compound 6 exhibits high xanthine oxidase inhibitory activity and excellent metabolic stability and capable of being administered in the method for treatment of prevention of retinitis pigmentosa to a subject in need thereof. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sagar Patel whose telephone number is (571)272-1317. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 9am to 5pm EST. 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, Amy L. Clark can be reached at (571) 272-1310. 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. /Sagar Patel/Examiner, Art Unit 1626 /KAMAL A SAEED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1626
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 06, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112
Mar 27, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599616
NOVEL SUBTITUTED SULFONYLUREA AND SULFOXIMINEUREA DERIVATIVES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594290
IP AND IP ANALOGS DOSAGE REGIMENS FOR THE TREATMENT OF ECTOPIC CALCIFICATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590107
CERIUM (IV) COMPLEXES AND THEIR USE IN ORGANIC ELECTRONICS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589096
RUXOLITINIB FORMULATION FOR REDUCTION OF ITCH IN ATOPIC DERMATITIS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583858
TDO2 Inhibitors
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
76%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+33.8%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 455 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