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. Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on February 12, 2026 is acknowledged. Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: The use of the terms IRDye ®, Higgins ®, VEVO®, MSOT™, InVision ™ , which are a trade name or a mark used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The term should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore the term should be capitalized wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term. Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks. Appropriate correction is required. 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(s) 1-3, 33, and 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pitner et al. ( US 2020 0009272 ; cited on IDS filed July 5, 202 3 ) . Regarding claim 1 , Pitner discloses a photoacoustic imaging contrast agent comprising at least one radiation-absorbing component comprising a metallobacteriochlorin (claim 1). Pitner discloses that the bacteriochlorins can be complexed to metals such as copper (Cu) (¶ 80). Regarding claim 2, Pitner discloses that the photoacoustic imaging contrast can comprise a plurality of different metallobacteriochlorins , each metallobacteriochlorin having a different absorption spectrum in the range of 650-1070 nm (claim 2). Pitner discloses that the bacteriochlorins can be complexed to metals such as Cu (¶ 80). Regarding claim 3, Pitner discloses that ( i ) the photoacoustic imaging contrast agent can comprise at least three different metallobacteriochlorins ; (ii) each metallobacteriochlorin can ha ve an absorption spectrum with a peak absorption value in the range of 700-950 nm; and (iii) the at least three absorption spectra are substantially non-overlapping in the range of 700-950 nm (claim 3) . Regarding claim 33, Pitner discloses a pharmaceutical composition comprising the photoacoustic imaging contrast agent and a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier, diluent, or excipient (claim 33). Regarding claim 3 5 , Pitner discloses a water soluble metallobacteriochlorin (FIG. 7). Pitner discloses that the metallobacteriochlorin s can be used as contrast agents and solubilizing groups such as PEG chains can improve the biolabeling efficiency and bioconjugate stability (¶ 49). 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 . This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claims 1-4, 33 , and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pitner et al. (US 2020 0009272; cited on IDS filed July 5, 202 3 ) in view of Pucelik et al. ( Coordination Chemistr y Reviews, 2020 ; cited on IDS filed February 12, 2026 ). Regarding claims 1 - 3, 33, and 35, see the discussion above. Regarding claim 1, Pitner discloses a photoacoustic imaging contrast agent comprising at least one radiation-absorbing component comprising a metallobacteriochlorin (claim 1). Pitner discloses that the bacteriochlorins can be complexed to metals such as Cu (¶ 80). Regarding claim 2, Pitner discloses that the photoacoustic imaging contrast can comprise a plurality of different metallobacteriochlorins , each metallobacteriochlorin having a different absorption spectrum in the range of 650-1070 nm (claim 2). Pitner discloses that the bacteriochlorins can be complexed to metals such as Cu (¶ 80). Regarding claim 3, Pitner discloses that ( i ) the photoacoustic imaging contrast agent can comprise at least three different metallobacteriochlorins ; (ii) each metallobacteriochlorin can have an absorption spectrum with a peak absorption value in the range of 700-950 nm; and (iii) the at least three absorption spectra are substantially non- overlapping in the range of 700-950 nm (claim 3). Regarding claim 33, Pitner discloses a pharmaceutical composition comprising the photoacoustic imaging contrast agent and a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier, diluent, or excipient (claim 33). Regarding claim 35, Pitner discloses a water soluble metallobacteriochlorin (FIG. 7). Pitner discloses that the metallobacteriochlorin s can be used as contrast agents and solubilizing groups such as PEG chains can improve the biolabeling efficiency and bioconjugate stability (¶ 49). Regarding claim 4, Pitner discloses that iron (Fe) and/or cobalt (Co) metallobacteriochlorins can be used in addition to nickel (Ni) bacteriochlorins to enhance signal s for p hotoacoustic i maging (¶ 48). As discussed above, Pitner further discloses that bacteriochlorins can be complexed to metals such as Cu (¶ 80). Pitner does not disclose the photoacoustic imaging contrast agent compris ing at least one Cu -complexed bacteriochlorin in combination with at least one additional metallobacteriochlorin complexed to manganese (Mn) , zinc (Zn) , Ni , Fe , or Co . Pucelik discloses that metallobacteriochlorin s can be complexed with various metals including Cu , Ni, Fe, and Co, and that the introduction of various metal ions enables tuning of optical and redox properties , which in turn determine s their specific application (page 13, col.2 ¶ 2; page 14, Fig. 16 and Table 3; page 15, col. 2, ¶ 3; page 16, Fig. 19 and Table 5). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the contrast agent of Pitner to include Cu -complexed bacteriochlorin in addition to bacteriochlorins complexed with other metals such as Ni, Fe , and Co in order to adjust optical and redox properties of the agent . A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make these modifications and reasonably would have expected success because Pucelik teaches that metallobacteriochlorin s can be complexed with various metals and that these metals ions determine the characteristic s of the resulting contrast agent. Further, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to optimize the combination of different metal-comp l exed metallobacteriochlorins based on the specific requirements of the intended application. Accordingly, applying the teaching of Pucelik to the contrast agent of Pitner constitutes no more than the predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions, thus rendering claim 4 obvious. 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 1-4, 33 , and 35 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 5 of U.S. Patent No. US 12,042,548 (cited on PTO-892) in view of Pitner et al. (US 2020 0009272; cited on IDS filed July 5, 2023) and Pucelik et al. (Coordination Chemistry Reviews, 2020; cited on IDS filed February 12, 2026). Regarding claims 1 and 33 , claim 1 of the ‘ 548 recites a pharmaceutical composition comprising a photoacoustic imaging contrast agent and a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier, diluent, or excipient, wherein the photoacoustic imaging contrast agent comprises at least one radiation-absorbing component comprising a metallobacteriochlorin . The claims of the ‘ 548 does not disclose that the metallobacteriochlorin is complexed to Cu or Mn . As discussed above, Pitner discloses that bacteriochlorins can be complexed to metals such as Cu (¶ 80). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the metallobacteriochlorin of the ‘ 548 to be complexed with Cu . A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make these modifications and reasonably would have expected success because Pitner teaches bacteriochlorins can be complexed to metals such as Cu . Further, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to select metal ions complexed with bacteriochlorins based on the specific requirements of the intended application . Regarding claim 2, claim 5 of the ‘548 recites the contrast agent comprises a plurality of different metallobacteriochlorins , each metallobacteriochlorin having a different absorption spectrum in the range of 650-1070 nm. Regarding claim 3, the claims of the ‘548 does not disclose that the photoacoustic imaging contrast agent comprises at least three different metallobacteriochlorin , each metallobacteriochlorin ha s an absorption spectrum with a peak absorption value in the range of 700-950 nm , wherein the spectra are non-overlapping. As discussed above , Pitner discloses that ( i ) the photoacoustic imaging contrast agent can comprise at least three different metallobacteriochlorins ; (ii) each metallobacteriochlorin can have an absorption spectrum with a peak absorption value in the range of 700-950 nm; and (iii) the at least three absorption spectra are substantially non-overlapping in the range of 700-950 nm (claim 3). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the photoacoustic imaging contrast agent of the ‘548 by including three different metallobacteriochlorins having absorption spectrums in the range of 700-950 nm that do not overlap , as taught by Pitner , in order to improve the characteristics of the agents. Regarding claim 4, the claims of the ‘548 does not disclose that the photoacoustic imaging contrast agent comprising at least one Cu -complexed bacteriochlorin in combination with at least one additional metallobacteriochlorin complexed to Mn , Zn , Ni , Fe , or Co . As discussed above, Pitner discloses that Fe and/or Co metallobacteriochlorins can be used in addition to Ni bacteriochlorins to enhance signals for photoacoustic imaging (¶ 48). Pitner further discloses that bacteriochlorins can be complexed to metals such as Cu (¶ 80 ). Pucelik discloses that metallobacteriochlorins can be complexed with various metals including Cu, Ni, Fe, and Co, and that the introduction of various metal ions enables tuning of optical and redox properties, which in turn determines their specific application (page 13, col.2 ¶ 2; page 14, Fig. 16 and Table 3; page 15, col. 2, ¶ 3; page 16, Fig. 19 and Table 5). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the contrast agent of the ‘548 to include Cu-complexed bacteriochlorin in addition to bacteriochlorins complexed with other metals such as Ni, Fe, and Co , as taught by Pitner and Pucelik , in order to adjust optical and redox properties of the agent. Further, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to optimize the combination of different metal-complexed metallobacteriochlorins based on the specific requirements of the intended application. Regarding claim 35, the claims of the ‘548 does not disclose that the contrast agent is water soluble and can be PEGylated. As discusse d above, Pitner discloses that the contrast agent comprising metallobacteriochlorin can be water soluble (FIG. 7) and that solubilizing groups such as PEG chains can improve the biolabeling efficiency and bioconjugate stability (¶ 49). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the contrast agent of the ‘548 to be water soluble and PEGylated , as taught by Pitner , in order to improve the solubility and stability of the agent. Claims 1-4, 33, and 35 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1- 4 and 6 of U.S. Patent No. US 11,904,026 (cited on PTO-892) in view of Pitner et al. (US 2020 0009272; cited on IDS filed July 5, 2023). Regarding claim 1, claim 1 of the ‘026 recites a photoacoustic imaging contrast agent comprising at least one radiation-absorbing component, wherein the at least one radiation-absorbing component comprises a metallobacteriochlorin , and metal is selected from the group consisting of Cu and Mn. Regarding claim 2, claim 2 of the ‘026 recites the photoacoustic imaging contrast agent comprising a plurality of different metallobacteriochlorins , metallochlorins , or combinations thereof wherein each metallobacteriochlorin or metallochlorin has a different absorption spectrum in the range of 650-1070 nm and is complexed to Cu, Mn, Zn, Ni, Fe, or Co. Regarding claim 3, claim 3 of the ‘ 026 recites the photoacoustic imaging contrast agent wherein ( i ) the photoacoustic imaging contrast agent comprises at least three different metallobacteriochlorins or metallochlorins ; (ii) each metallobacteriochlorin or metallochlorin has an absorption spectrum with a peak absorption value in the range of 700-950 nm; and (iii) the at least three absorption spectra are substantially non-overlapping in the range of 700-950 nm. Regarding claim 4, claim 4 of the ‘026 recites the photoacoustic imaging contrast agent wherein the photoacoustic imaging contrast agent comprises at least one Cu -complexed bacteriochlorin and/or Cu -complexed chlorin, and at least one additional metallobacteriochlorin or metallochlorin complexed to a metal selected from the group consisting of Mn, Zn, Ni. Fe, and Co. Regarding claim 33, claim 6 of the ‘026 recites a pharmaceutical composition comprising the photoacoustic image contrast agent and a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier, diluent, or excipient. Regarding claim 35, the claims of the ‘026 does not disclose that the contrast agent is water soluble and can be PEGylated. As discussed above, Pitner discloses that the contrast agent comprising metallobacteriochlorin can be water soluble (FIG. 7) and that solubilizing groups such as PEG chains can improve the biolabeling efficiency and bioconjugate stability (¶ 49). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the contrast agent of the ‘ 026 to be water soluble and PEGylated, as taught by Pitner , in order to improve the solubility and stability of the agent. Claims 1-4, 33, and 35 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 -4 of copending Application No. 18/ 581,223 (US 2025 0099629 ; cited on PTO-892) in view of Pitner et al. (US 2020 0009272; cited on IDS filed July 5, 2023) . Regarding claim 1, claim 1 of the ‘223 recites a photoacoustic imaging contrast agent comprising at least one radiation-absorbing component, wherein the at least one radiation-absorbing component comprises a metallobacteriochlorin , a metallochlorin , a derivative thereof, or any combination thereof, wherein the metallobacteriochlorin , the metallochlorin , or the derivative thereof is complexed to Cu and Mn. Regarding claim 2, claim 2 of the ‘ 223 recites the photoacoustic imaging contrast agent comprising a plurality of different metallobacteriochlorins , metallochlorins , derivatives thereof, or combinations thereof, wherein each metallobacteriochlorin , metallochlorin , or derivative thereof has a different absorption spectrum in the range of 650-1070 nm and is complexed to Cu or Mn. Regarding claim 3, claim 3 of the ‘ 223 recites the photoacoustic imaging contrast agent wherein ( i ) the photoacoustic imaging contrast agent comprises at least three different metallobacteriochlorins , metallochlorins , and/or derivatives thereof ; (ii) each metallobacteriochlorin , metallochlorin , and/or derivative thereof has an absorption spectrum with a peak absorption value in the range of 700-950 nm; and (iii) the at least three absorption spectra are substantially non-overlapping in the range of 700-950 nm. Regarding claim 4, claim 4 of the ‘ 223 recites the photoacoustic imaging contrast agent wherein the photoacoustic imaging contrast agent comprises at least one Cu -complexed bacteriochlorin , Cu r-complexed chlorin, and/or derivative thereof, and at least one additional metallobacteriochlorin , metallochlorin , and/or derivative thereof complexed to a metal selected from the group consisting of Mn, Zn, Ni. Fe, and Co. Regarding claim 33, the claim s of the ‘ 22 3 does not disclose that a pharmaceutical composition comprising the photoacoustic image contrast agent and a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier, diluent, or excipient. As discussed above, Pitner discloses a pharmaceutical composition comprising the photoacoustic imaging contrast agent and a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier, diluent, or excipient (claim 33). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the contrast agent of the ‘223 to prepare a pharmaceutical composition with a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier, diluent, or excipient, as taught by Pitner , for pharmaceutical applications . Regarding claim 35, the claims of the ‘ 223 does not disclose that the contrast agent is water soluble and can be PEGylated. As discussed above, Pitner discloses that the contrast agent comprising metallobacteriochlorin can be water soluble (FIG. 7) and that solubilizing groups such as PEG chains can improve the biolabeling efficiency and bioconjugate stability (¶ 49). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the contrast agent of the ‘ 223 to be water soluble and PEGylated, as taught by Pitner , in order to improve the solubility and stability of the agent. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT JONG HWAN BAEK whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-0670 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Mon - Thu, 9 am - 3 pm ET . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Michael G Hartley can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-0616 . 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. /JONG HWAN BAEK/ Examiner, Art Unit 1618 /Michael G. Hartley/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1618