Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 26, 2026
Application No. 18/336,712

THE MODE OF ACTION OF N-MeDCPA ON TRPC CHANNELS

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Jun 16, 2023
Priority
Jun 17, 2022 — provisional 63/366,585
Examiner
LEE, ANDREW P
Art Unit
1691
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
United States Department of Veterans Affairs
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
48%
Grant Probability
Moderate
2-3
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
71%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 48% of resolved cases
48%
Career Allowance Rate
288 granted / 594 resolved
-11.5% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+22.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
43 currently pending
Career history
654
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.0%
-39.0% vs TC avg
§103
57.0%
+17.0% vs TC avg
§102
7.8%
-32.2% vs TC avg
§112
21.0%
-19.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 594 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Status of the Application Claims 1-17 are pending. Receipt and consideration of Applicants' amended claim set and remarks/arguments filed on 05/11/2026 are acknowledged. Claims under consideration in the instant office action are claims 1-17. Applicants' arguments, filed 05/11/2026, have been fully considered but they are not deemed to be persuasive. The rejections of claims 1-2, 4-5, 7-10, and 12-16 under 35 U.S.C. 102 and claims 3, 6, 11, and 17 under 35 U.S.C. 103 are withdrawn since Barnett is excepted as prior art. Rejections and/or objections not reiterated from previous office actions are hereby withdrawn. The following rejections and/or objections are either reiterated or newly applied. They constitute the complete set presently being applied to the instant application. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The specification discloses “a method of restoring the balance of osteoclast to osteoblast activity in a patient having rheumatoid arthritis is provided comprising administering to a patient a therapeutically effective amount of a compound N-(3,4-dichlorophenyl)-N-methylpropanamide for restoring the balance of osteoclast to osteoblast activity in said patient.” (pg. 3, 1st paragraph), but does not disclose a particular method or process to perform that would result in restoring the balance of osteoclast to osteoblast activity. Thus, Applicant does not provide adequate support for a method of restoring the balance of osteoclast to osteoblast activity. 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 7-17 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. Claim 7 contains the trademark/trade name N-methyl-DCPA. Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. In the present case, the trademark/trade name is used to identify/describe N-(3,4-dichlorophenyl)-N-methylpropanamide and, accordingly, the identification/description is indefinite. Claims 7-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential steps, such omission amounting to a gap between the steps. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted steps are: steps drawn towards targeting a transient receptor potential channel outside of inhibiting TRPC channels. The specification discloses the inhibitory activity of compound ELP-004 on TRPC channels (see Fig. 5), but the disclosure does not provide adequate guidance for the targeting of TRPC channels that is not inhibiting of TRPC channels. Conclusion Claims 1-3 and 7-17 are rejected. Claims 4-6 are allowed. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW P LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-1016. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm. 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, Renee Claytor can be reached at (571)272-8394. 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. /ANDREW P LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 1691 /RENEE CLAYTOR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1691
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 16, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
May 11, 2026
Response Filed
Sep 29, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12746219
METHODS AND COMPOSITIONS FOR PREVENTING SKIN TOXICITIES CAUSED BY BIOLOGICAL TARGETED CANCER DRUGS
4y 7m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12721857
BORATE COMPLEXES OF CHLOROGENIC ACID AND USES THEREOF
2y 4m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12692231
TRYPTAMINE DERIVATIVES
1y 9m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12685731
ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
5y 10m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12655142
4-(IMIDAZO[1,2-A]PYRIDIN-3-YL)-PYRIMIDINE DERIVATIVES
4y 4m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
48%
Grant Probability
71%
With Interview (+22.8%)
3y 4m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 594 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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