Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/271,523

NOVEL BENZOAZEPINE COMPOUND, AND COMPOSITION AND USE THEREOF

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Jul 10, 2023
Examiner
MCDOWELL, BRIAN E
Art Unit
1624
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Shanghaitech University
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allow Rate
818 granted / 1102 resolved
+14.2% vs TC avg
Strong +30% interview lift
Without
With
+30.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
58 currently pending
Career history
1160
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.0%
-39.0% vs TC avg
§103
15.0%
-25.0% vs TC avg
§102
19.5%
-20.5% vs TC avg
§112
47.6%
+7.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1102 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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 . DETAILED ACTION RESPONSE TO ELECTION/RESTRICTION Applicant’s election of group I, drawn to compounds of the formula I and simple compositions thereof and elected species: PNG media_image1.png 126 302 media_image1.png Greyscale in the reply filed on 12/11/2025 is acknowledged. The elected species reads on claims 1-4 and 7-9. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.03(a)). The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Claims 5, 6, and 11-18 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. An action on the merits of claims 1-4 and 7-9 is contained herein. Priority This application is a national phase entry under 35 U.S.C. 371 of international application PCT/CN2021/139112, filed 12/17/2021, which claims priority to Application CN202110067206.6, filed 1/19/2021. However, a certified English version of the foreign priority document was not received. Failure to provide a certified translation may result in no benefit being accorded for the non-English application (i.e., the examiner respectfully requests submission of the appropriate English translated version of the foreign priority document if benefit is sought). See MPEP 213.04. Information Disclosure Statement The examiner has considered the references cited in the information disclosure statement filed of record. The NPL document at line CD referencing a compound in REGISTRY is illegible and should be replaced for clarity. Correction is required. Specification Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an Abstract of the Disclosure, see MPEP 608.01(b). In chemical patent abstracts for compounds or compositions, the general nature of the compound or composition should be given as well as its use, e.g., "The compounds are of the class of alkyl benzene sulfonyl ureas, useful as oral anti-diabetics." Exemplification of a species could be illustrative of members of the class. For processes, the type reaction, reagents and process conditions should be stated, generally illustrated by a single example unless variations are necessary. It is recommended that the structure of Formula I be inserted into the abstract to accurately illustrate the claimed invention. Claim Objections Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informality: The preamble of this claim should be amended to incorporate appropriate alternative language such as “wherein the compound is selected from the group consisting of..” or other similar language. 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. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1-4 and 8-9 are 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. In the instant claim 1 and other claims, the phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Thus the claim and claims dependent on it which do not rectify the issue are considered indefinite. Claim 1 states that variable Y may be selected from “O” which results in the oxygen atom possessing three bonds and being positively charged. However the formula I is intended to be neutral. Thus the scope is unclear. Claim 3 recites the following language: PNG media_image2.png 112 774 media_image2.png Greyscale . The embodiment 5-6 membered heterocyclyl-CH2n (see red arrow) was not recited previously as an embodiment for R5 as shown above. Thus the scope is unclear. See In re Zletz, 13 USPQ2d 1320, 1322, “An essential purpose of patent examination is to fashion claims that are precise, clear, correct and unambiguous.” Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d): (d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), fourth paragraph: Subject to the [fifth paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA )], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 9 does not further limit claim 1 with respect to “stereoisomer” since this language was not recited previously in claim 1. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements. 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. Claims 1-3 and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated over US Patent 5,258,510-mentioned in IDS. US Patent 5,258,510 teaches the following compounds and compositions thereof (see col. 322, li. 20, col. 345, li. 20, and abstract for compositions): PNG media_image3.png 606 604 media_image3.png Greyscale wherein Y = -CH, m = 0, R2,3,5 = H, R4 = heteroaryl or H, and R1 = methyl or chloro which anticipates the claims. Conclusion Claims 1-4 and 8-9 are rejected. Claim 7 is objected to. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN E MCDOWELL whose telephone number is (571)270-5755. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30-6 MF. 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /BRIAN E MCDOWELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1624
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 10, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 24, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599615
USE OF CAROTENOIDS IN THE TREATMENT OF SENESCENCE-RELATED DISEASES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12604600
Organic Electroluminescent Element And Novel Iridium Complex
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12559494
NOVEL FUNCTIONALIZED LACTAMS AS MODULATORS OF THE 5-HYDROXYTRYPTAMINE RECEPTOR 7 AND THEIR METHOD OF USE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12552807
PCSK9 INHIBITORS AND METHODS OF USE THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12545665
CRYSTAL FORM OF 6-(CYCLOPROPANECARBOXAMIDO)-4-((2-METHOXY-3-(1-METHYL-1H-1,2,4-TRIAZOL-3-YL)PHENYL)AMINO)-N-(METHYL-D3) PYRIDAZINE-3-CARBOXAMIDE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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
74%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+30.3%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1102 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