Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/295,582

TETRAPYRROLE-BASED COMPOUNDS AND THEIR FOMULATIONS FOR ANTI-MICROBIAL THERAPY

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Apr 04, 2023
Examiner
PATEL, SAGAR S
Art Unit
1626
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft zur Förderung der angewandten Forschung e.V.
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
2-3
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
345 granted / 455 resolved
+15.8% vs TC avg
Strong +34% interview lift
Without
With
+33.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
30 currently pending
Career history
485
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.0%
-39.0% vs TC avg
§103
32.8%
-7.2% vs TC avg
§102
20.7%
-19.3% vs TC avg
§112
23.6%
-16.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 455 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Status of the Claims Claims 1 – 6, 9 and 13 – 14 are pending. Claims 1 – 2 are rejected. Claims 3 – 6, 9 and 13 – 14 are withdrawn. Noncompliant Amendment The Amendment filed on December 17, 2025 is not compliant with the requirements of 37 CFR 1.121(c)(2) which states in part that “All claims being currently amended in an amendment paper shall be presented in the claim listing, indicate a status of "currently amended," and be submitted with markings to indicate the changes that have been made relative to the immediate prior version of the claims. The text of any added subject matter must be shown by underlining the added text”. Claim 3 recites the limitation “A method of treating a microbial disease, comprising administering an effective amount of a compound of claim 1 or 2 to a patient in need thereof”. See, page 3. Claim 14 recites the limitation “A liposomal formulation comprising (a) a lipid and (b) a compound of claim 1 or a compound of claim 2”. See, page 5. However, each of the limitations in claim 3 and 14 is a newly recited limitation but does not indicate proper marking (underlining the added text). Amendment is required to underline all added text in the claims to indicate the changes that have been made relative to the immediate prior version of the claims. Since Applicant’s reply appears bona fide, the amendment has been entered; however, appropriate correction is required in replying to this Office Action. Election/ Restriction Claims 3 – 6, 9 and 13 – 14 are directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons: Claims 3 – 6, 9 and 13 – 14 have been amended to recite a new invention of a method of treating a microbial disease, comprising administering an effective amount of a compound of claim 1 or 2 to a patient in need thereof. Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, claim 3 – 6, 9 and 13 – 14 are withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03 Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention. Response to Applicant’s Remarks Applicant’s remarks filed on December 17, 2025 have been fully considered. The objections to claims 1 – 2 are withdrawn in view of the amendment to insert a period (.) at the end of each claim. The rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) of claims 1 – 2 (claims 3 – 6, 9 and 13 – 14 are withdrawn, and claims 7 – 8 and 10 – 12 are cancelled) as being indefinite is withdrawn in view of the amendment to delete the terms “based on” in each of the claims. The rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) of claims 3 – 6, 9 and 13 – 14 (said claims are withdrawn, and claims 7 – 8 and 10 – 12 are cancelled) as being indefinite is withdrawn in view of the amendment to delete the term “derivative” in each of the claims. The rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) of claim 13 (said claim is withdrawn) as being indefinite is withdrawn in view of the amendment to delete the exemplary limitations “e.g.”. The rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) of claims 3 – 6, 9 and 13 – 14 (said claims are withdrawn, and claims 7 – 8 and 10 – 12 are cancelled) as being of improper dependent form is withdrawn in view of the amendment to delete the limitation “or a pharmaceutically acceptable derivative thereof”. The rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) of claim 1 (claims 3 – 6, 9 and 13 – 14 are withdrawn, and claims 7 – 8 and 10 – 12 are cancelled) as being anticipated by Senge et al., Photodiagnosis and Photodynamic Therapy (2012), 9: pp. 170-179 is withdrawn in view of the amendment to delete compounds 1 and 2. Examination: Applicant’s amendments necessitate extending the search. In accordance with MPEP §803.02, examination of the Markush-type claim has been extended to the scope of compound of formula 3 (claim 1), and tetrapyrrole zinc complex of formula 4 (claim 2). However, a 2nd Non-Final action is issued in order to address the rejection under 102(a)(1) (not previously addressed) of claim 2 as being anticipated by Hunter et al., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2011, 133, pp. 582-594. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on January 21, 2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Claim Objection Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informality: Line 3 of the claim: The structure of the tetrapyrrole compound of formula 3 is PNG media_image1.png 296 376 media_image1.png Greyscale . The structure is incomplete. According to the claims dated February 20, 2024, the structure of the tetrapyrrole compound of formula 3 is PNG media_image2.png 312 342 media_image2.png Greyscale . In order to overcome the objection, Applicant may amend to replace the structure presented above. Appropriate correction is required. For examination purposes, the structure of the tetrapyrrole compound of formula 3 is considered as PNG media_image2.png 312 342 media_image2.png Greyscale . 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. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Langer et al. WO 2011/071968 A2. Langer et al. teach compound mTHPD-OH. See, e.g., page 10. Compound mTHPD-OH is presented below: PNG media_image3.png 374 368 media_image3.png Greyscale . The prior art anticipates the instant claims as presented below: Claim 1, directed to a tetrapyrrole compound of formula 3: PNG media_image2.png 312 342 media_image2.png Greyscale . Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hunter et al., J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2011, 133, pp. 582-594. Hunter et al. teach compound P1a. See, e.g., page 584, Figure 3. Compound P1a is presented below: PNG media_image4.png 626 582 media_image4.png Greyscale . The prior art anticipates the instant claims as presented below: Claim 2, directed to a tetrapyrrole zinc complex of formula 4: PNG media_image5.png 328 358 media_image5.png Greyscale . Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sagar Patel whose telephone number is (571)272-1317. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 9am to 5pm EST. 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, Amy L. Clark can be reached at (571) 272-1310. 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. /Sagar Patel/Examiner, Art Unit 1626 /KAMAL A SAEED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1626
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 04, 2023
Application Filed
Aug 22, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Dec 17, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 24, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599616
NOVEL SUBTITUTED SULFONYLUREA AND SULFOXIMINEUREA DERIVATIVES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599575
ANTIMICROBIAL ADJUVANT CONTAINING BIPHENYL DERIVATIVE COMPOUND AS ACTIVE INGREDIENT, AND USES THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594290
IP AND IP ANALOGS DOSAGE REGIMENS FOR THE TREATMENT OF ECTOPIC CALCIFICATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590107
CERIUM (IV) COMPLEXES AND THEIR USE IN ORGANIC ELECTRONICS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589096
RUXOLITINIB FORMULATION FOR REDUCTION OF ITCH IN ATOPIC DERMATITIS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
76%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+33.8%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 455 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