Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/277,104

HERBICIDAL CYCLIC AMIDES N-SUBSTITUTED WITH A HALOALKYLSULFONYLANILIDE GROUP

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Aug 14, 2023
Examiner
PAK, JOHN D
Art Unit
1699
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Fmc Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
52%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 52% of resolved cases
52%
Career Allow Rate
512 granted / 986 resolved
-8.1% vs TC avg
Strong +38% interview lift
Without
With
+37.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
47 currently pending
Career history
1033
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
58.3%
+18.3% vs TC avg
§102
6.2%
-33.8% vs TC avg
§112
11.6%
-28.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 986 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Claims 1-4, 7-8, 11-13, 16-19, and 21-31 are pending in this application. 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph 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 1-2, 7, 11, 16-19, and 21-31 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. (1) In independent claim 1, “G and R5 are taken together to form N-OR15” is vague and indefinite. Does it mean the N is double bonded to the ring moiety, or does it leave open the variation that N is single bonded to the ring moiety and the N can be substituted? The metes and bounds of this structural feature are unclear. See also claims 16-19. (2) Definition of R10 includes C1-7 haloalkoxy. This would result in, for example, O-O-CF3, which appears to be a highly reactive substituent that may not be stable. Thus, this substituent is confusing as R10 here, and one skilled in the art would be confused as to a substituent that could have been intended instead. See below for additional context. (3) Also for R10, “carboalkyl” and “carboalkoxy” are confusing – PNG media_image1.png 164 536 media_image1.png Greyscale It is not clear what meaning or limitation “carbo” brings to “alkyl” or “alkoxy.” (4) Claims 22 and 23 recite chemical nomenclature, but there are big gaps or large number of spaces between terms. This raises uncertainty as to whether there are missing terms. See examples below – PNG media_image2.png 412 668 media_image2.png Greyscale PNG media_image3.png 662 636 media_image3.png Greyscale (4) In claim 23 there is a period after compound 4, but the claim continues with three more compounds. After the last compound (compound 9), there is no period. A claim must end with a period and there should be no more claim text afterwards. (5) Claim 28 has an unusual indefiniteness problem. Claim 28 depends on a subsequent claim, claim 29, which is not per se indefinite. However, claim 29 and its base claim(s) do not provide a definition of (b1) to (b16) active ingredients – only claim 26 provides such a definition (and claim 28 does not depend on claim 26). Consequently, recitation of (b1) to (b16) in claim 28 is a recitation of ingredients that are undefined with respect to claim 28 and its base claim. Claims dependent on these claims, which do not cure deficiencies of their base claims, are included in this ground of rejection. Objection to claims Claims 3, 4, 8, 12, and 13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Prior art discussion The Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority cited US 4,208,202 and WO 2013/149704. US 4,208,202 discloses the following compounds for regulating plant growth, wherein Q is an alkylene radical having 2-5 carbon atoms, which can be substituted by halogen, CN, or lower alkyl or alkoxy: PNG media_image4.png 172 230 media_image4.png Greyscale . Thus, US 4,208,202 fails to teach or suggest a substituent that corresponds to G or R5 and G taken together to form N-OR15, as required in the instant application claims. WO 2013/149704 (US 2015/0031670 is a patent family member) discloses the following compounds as methionine aminopeptidase inhibitors: PNG media_image5.png 128 164 media_image5.png Greyscale , wherein X can be C=O, R3 can be OH. However, R-Y- does not correspond to or suggest R5 of the instant application claims. US 5,705,456 is cited to further show the state of the art. US 5,705,456 discloses the following compounds as intermediates of herbicides (columns 1-2): PNG media_image6.png 92 158 media_image6.png Greyscale , wherein Ar is PNG media_image7.png 116 116 media_image7.png Greyscale , and wherein X does not correspond to or suggest the NR4SO2Rf moiety of the instant application claims. In sum, the prior art taken as a whole does not adequately disclose, suggest, or otherwise render obvious the presently claimed compounds. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to JOHN PAK whose telephone number is (571)272-0620. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday from 8:30 AM to 5 PM. If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner's SPE, Fereydoun Sajjadi, can be reached on (571)272-3311. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). 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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form. /JOHN PAK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1699
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 14, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599136
SUBSTITUTED ISOPHTHALIC ACID DIAMIDES AND THEIR USE AS HERBICIDES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12588680
AN INSECTICIDAL COMPOSITION BASED ON SAPONIFIED TALL OIL AND METHOD FOR PRODUCTION THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582119
FORMULATION AND COMPOSITION WHICH PROMOTE TARGETED POLLINATION BY BEES TOWARDS KIWI CROPS AND RELATED METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582125
AN INSECTICIDAL COMPOSITION BASED ON SAPONIFIED TALL OIL AND METHOD FOR PRODUCTION THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12568962
ADDITIVE INGREDIENTS OF SYNERGISTS AND SURFACTANTS PROVIDED IN A SINGLE-USE TRANSPORTER PREFERABLY FOR USE WITH WEED CONTROL, INSECT CONTROL AND MOLD REMOVAL COMPOSITIONS
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
52%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+37.7%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 986 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