Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/279,004

LIPOSOMAL FORMULATIONS OF BORONIC ACID CONTAINING ACTIVE AGENTS

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Aug 25, 2023
Examiner
RONEY, CELESTE A
Art Unit
1612
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Ohio State Innovation Foundation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 12m
To Grant
81%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
452 granted / 723 resolved
+2.5% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+18.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 12m
Avg Prosecution
68 currently pending
Career history
791
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.7%
-38.3% vs TC avg
§103
54.0%
+14.0% vs TC avg
§102
5.9%
-34.1% vs TC avg
§112
19.8%
-20.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 723 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-14, drawn to a liposomal formulation comprising liposomes and an encapsulated capturing agent-active agent complex, in the reply filed on 11/17/2025, is acknowledged. Applicant’s species elections, in the reply filed on 11/17/2025, are acknowledged: Capturing agent-active complex: PNG media_image1.png 149 297 media_image1.png Greyscale Aromatic diol (Tiron): PNG media_image2.png 122 170 media_image2.png Greyscale Boronic acid containing acid agent (Bortezomib): PNG media_image3.png 155 215 media_image3.png Greyscale Claims 9, 11-12, 15-18 and 53 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species or invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 11/17/2025. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 – Indefiniteness, Broad to Narrow Limitations and Indefinite Language 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 5 and 13 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. Regarding broad to narrow limitations, 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 5 recites the broad recitations of the lipids, and the claim also recites the lipids in parentheses, which are the narrower statements of the range/limitations. The claim(s) are 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 the present instance, claim 13 recites the broad recitations of the drugs, and the claim also recites the drugs in parentheses, which are the narrower statements of the range/limitations. The claim(s) are 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. The Applicant is encouraged to remove the parentheses from claims 5 and 13. The Examiner notes that claim 6 is not rejected as indefinite because it does not appear that DSPE-PEG has a meaning other than as PEG conjugated DSPE, whereas DSPG (claim 5) can refer to the lipid, or the abbreviation can refer, for example, to the “Data Science for the Public Good”, and hence, the term in the parenthesis is indefinite. Further regarding claim 13, the phrase "for example" or “e.g.” renders the claim indefinite, because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). The Applicant is encouraged to remove the indefinite language, as well as the parentheses (see above), from claim 13. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 - Obviousness 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. Claim(s) 1-8, 10 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caligiuri et al (US 2016/0347791 A1) in view of Zou et al (Clin Cancer Res, 2006; 12(1), January 1, 2006). Caligiuri taught liposomal formulations formed from vesicle-forming lipids (e.g., phospholipids (e.g., DSPC [0267]), lipids (e.g., cholesterol) and PEG-conjugated lipids (e.g., DSPE-PEG)) [0152-0154, 0208, 0215]. The liposomes generally contained boronic acid compounds [0009], complexed via the boron moiety of bortezomib (BTZ) [0164, Examples 1-6; see also ¶s 0147-0148]. Said boronic acid compounds, entrapped in the liposomes, were sequestered in the central aqueous compartment, or within a bilayer of the liposomes [0151]. Although Caligiuri taught liposomes generally containing boronic acid compounds, Caligiuri did not specifically teach PNG media_image1.png 149 297 media_image1.png Greyscale , as instantly elected. Zou taught that Tiron PNG media_image4.png 93 134 media_image4.png Greyscale forms a direct chemical bond PNG media_image5.png 109 293 media_image5.png Greyscale with the boronic acid moiety PNG media_image6.png 58 58 media_image6.png Greyscale of bortezomib PNG media_image7.png 111 187 media_image7.png Greyscale , which reads on the instantly elected capturing agent-active agent complex [see Zou at Figs. 1 and 7a; see also Zou’s abstract; page 276, right column and 1st ¶; and the penultimate paragraph of page 279]. Reproductions are below: PNG media_image8.png 464 516 media_image8.png Greyscale PNG media_image9.png 287 535 media_image9.png Greyscale . Since Caligiuri generally taught boronic acid compounds, complexed via the boron moiety of bortezomib, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include, within the teachings of Caligiuri, Tiron, as taught by Zou. The ordinarily skilled artisan would have been guided by Zou’s teachings that Tiron forms a direct chemical bond with the boronic acid moiety of bortezomib, as taught by Zou et al. Caligiuri, in view of Zhou, reads on claims 1-8, 10 and 13-14. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CELESTE A RONEY whose telephone number is (571)272-5192. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday; 8 AM-6 PM. 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, Sahana S Kaup can be reached at 571-272-6897. 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. /CELESTE A RONEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1612
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 25, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 13, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599573
COMPOSITIONS AND USES THEREOF IN TREATING CANCERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599559
CD1D-LIGAND-COMPOUND-CONTAINING LIPOSOME PREPARATION HAVING IMPROVED PHARMACOKINETICS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594232
PERSONAL CARE COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR USING SUCH COMPOSITIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589169
COMPOUND AND MRI CONTRAST AGENT CONTAINING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582353
EVALUATING DRUG EFFICACY BY USING WEARABLE SENSORS
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
62%
Grant Probability
81%
With Interview (+18.8%)
2y 12m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 723 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