Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/262,429

METHOD FOR THE CONTROL OR SUPPRESSION OF PHYTOPATHOGENIC BACTERIA

Non-Final OA §101§102§103
Filed
Jul 21, 2023
Examiner
BURKETT, DANIEL JOHN
Art Unit
1624
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Syngenta Crop Protection AG
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allow Rate
51 granted / 75 resolved
+8.0% vs TC avg
Strong +28% interview lift
Without
With
+28.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
49 currently pending
Career history
124
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.3%
-36.7% vs TC avg
§103
20.1%
-19.9% vs TC avg
§102
17.1%
-22.9% vs TC avg
§112
39.2%
-0.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 75 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §102 §103
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 Claims 1-8 are pending in the instant application. Domestic Benefit Acknowledgement is made of Applicant’s claim for domestic benefit based on the U.S. Provisional Application No. 63/140,459, filed on January 22nd, 2021. Instant Claims 1-8 are fully supported by this application, and will be evaluated with an effective filing date of January 22nd, 2021. Information Disclosure Statement The Information Disclosure Statements received on July 21st, 2023, February 8th, 2024, and January 5th, 2026 have fully considered by the examiner, except where marked with a strikethrough. Specification The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any of the errors of which Applicant may become aware of in the specification. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claim is drawn to a “use” without positively reciting any steps to a process thereof. Per MPEP 2173.05(q), “”Use” claims that do not purport to claim a process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter fail to comply with 35 U.S.C. 101. In re Moreton, 288 F.2d 708, 709, 129, USPQ 227, 228 (CCPA 1961)(“one cannot claim a new use per se, because it is not among the categories of patentable inventions specified in 35 U.S.C. § 101”).” 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 1-4 and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rajan et. al. (WO 2010/063700; cited on Applicant’s Information Disclosure Statement filed July 21st, 2023; hereinafter referred to as Rajan) as evidenced by CAS Registry File 1228284-64-7 (entered into STN June 24th, 2010; hereinafter referred to as CAS Registry File). At Page 15, First Paragraph, Rajan teaches a method of controlling or preventing infestation of useful plants by phytopathogenic microorganisms, including phytopathogenic bacteria, by applying a compound of formula I. At Page 23, under Example P3, Rajan teaches the following compound as a compound of formula I: PNG media_image1.png 127 228 media_image1.png Greyscale As evidenced by CAS Registry File, this compound is 3-(difluoromethyl)-N-methoxy-1-methyl-N-[1-methyl-2-(2,4,6-trichloro-phenyl)ethyl]-1H-pyrazole-4-carboxamide, as recited, for example at instant Claim 1. Regarding instant Claim 2, at Page 18, Second Paragraph, Rajan teaches, “Therefore the inention also relates to compositions for controlling and protecting against phytopathogenic microorganisms, comprising a compound of formula I and an inert carrier,” thereby reading on the limitation of applying a composition as recited at instant Claim 2. At Page 15, Last Paragraph, Rajan states, “Furthermore, the novel compounds of formula I are effective against phytopathogenic bacteria and viruses (e.g. against Xanthomonas spp, Pseudomonas spp, …” Each of these species are recited at instant Claims 3 and 4. At Page 16, First Paragraph, Rajan teaches useful plants suitable for protection include tomatoes and rice, each of which are recited instantly at Claim 6. At Page 19, Fifth Paragraph, Rajan teaches “Advantageous rates of application are normally from 5g to 2kg of active ingredient (a.i.) per hectare (ha), preferably from 10g to 1kg a.i./ha, most preferably from 20g to 600g a.i./ha.” This “most preferably” range reads on the range instantly recited at Claim 7. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rajan et. al. (WO 2010/063700; cited on Applicant’s Information Disclosure Statement filed July 21st, 2023; hereinafter referred to as Rajan) as evidenced by CAS Registry File 1228284-64-7 (entered into STN June 24th, 2010; hereinafter referred to as CAS Registry File). As noted above, Claim 1 is anticipated, as Rajan teaches a method of controlling or preventing infestation of phytogenic bacteria by administering 3-(difluoromethyl)-N-methoxy-1-methyl-N-[1-methyl-2-(2,4,6-trichloro-phenyl)ethyl]-1H-pyrazole-4-carboxamide to a plant. Further, Rajan teaches at Page 15, Last Paragraph, that this compound is effective in treating Xanthomonas spp. Rajan does not teach controlling or suppressing Xanthomonas campestris, Xanthomonas orycea, or Xanthomonas perforans. Xanthomonas campestris, Xanthomonas orycea, and Xanthomonas perforans are species of the genus Xanthomonas spp. While Rajan does not teach control or suppression of these species in particular, applying KSR rationale E, it would have been prima facie obvious to try controlling or suppressing the aforementioned species of the genus Xanthomonas spp., as it was known in the art at the time of filing that application of 3-(difluoromethyl)-N-methoxy-1-methyl-N-[1-methyl-2-(2,4,6-trichloro-phenyl)ethyl]-1H-pyrazole-4-carboxamide was effective against the genus. Taken together, this would result in the practice of Claim 5 with reasonable expectation of success. Conclusion Claims 1-8 are rejected. No claim is allowed. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL JOHN BURKETT whose telephone number is (703)756-5390. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday. 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, Jeffrey Murray can be reached at (571) 272-9023. 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. /D.J.B./ Examiner, Art Unit 1624 /JEFFREY H MURRAY/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1624
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 21, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 26, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12590061
CRYSTALLINE FORM OF ACETYLCHOLINESTERASE INHIBITOR AND PREPARATION METHOD THEREFOR AND APPLICATION THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583870
AZAHETEROARYL COMPOUND AND APPLICATION THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582661
SYNTHESIS AND APPLICATION OF CLASS OF RESPIRATORY SYNCYTIAL VIRUS INHIBITORS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577252
DRUG FOR THE TREATMENT OF DISEASES CAUSED BY BACTERIA
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12569485
SMARCA INHIBITORS AND USES THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
68%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+28.2%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 75 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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