Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/344,560

CD73 COMPOUNDS

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Jun 29, 2023
Examiner
SEITZ, ANTHONY JOSEPH
Art Unit
1629
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Gilead Sciences Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 8m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allow Rate
108 granted / 158 resolved
+8.4% vs TC avg
Strong +28% interview lift
Without
With
+27.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 8m
Avg Prosecution
74 currently pending
Career history
232
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.5%
-36.5% vs TC avg
§103
25.8%
-14.2% vs TC avg
§102
18.7%
-21.3% vs TC avg
§112
23.2%
-16.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 158 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 . DETAILED ACTION Election of Species and Status of the Claims Applicant’s election of a 4-8 membered heterocyclyl or O-4-8 membered heterocyclyl for position Y and 4-12 membered heterocyclyl for position R1 in the response filed on December 3rd 2025 is acknowledged. Examiner notes that the election of species requirement filed on October 3rd 2025 required the election of a ‘single specific compound.’ A comprehensive response to the election of species requirement would include a single particular compound, identified by either IUPAC name or a complete chemical structure. For example, one single compound from the compounds listed in claim 13. However, as applicant’s amendments to claim 1 in the response filed on December 3rd 2025 have narrowed the scope of the compound genus of claim 1, the search strategy required to accomplish a complete search of the compound genus has been simplified, and the compound genus is no longer considered a search burden. The election of species requirement is thereby withdrawn. Claims 1-2, 5-6, 10-11, and 13-15 are pending and are examined on their merits. Priority Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 120 is acknowledged. Applicant has complied with all conditions for receiving the benefit of an earlier filing date under 35 U.S.C. 120 based on the date of the provisional application 63/357,948 filed on July 1st 2022. Information Disclosure Statement The Information Disclosure Statement filed on December 3rd 2025 and December 1st 2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and have been considered in full. A signed copy of references cited from the IDS is included with this Office Action. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(d) 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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph: Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], 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. Claims 14 and 15 are 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. Claims 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(d) because a multiple dependent claim may not depend on another multiple dependent claim. 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 § 112(b) 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. Claim 13 is 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 13 is indefinite for failing to further limit the compounds of claim 1. Specifically, the Y-R1 combinations recited in the claim do not fall into the scope of the compounds of claim 1. For example, claim 1 allows for Y to be either 4-8 membered heterocyclyl or O-4-8 membered heterocyclyl. Claim 13 recites compounds in which no heterocyclyl group is present: PNG media_image1.png 95 225 media_image1.png Greyscale . Additionally, in the compounds in which a proper Y group is present, a proper R1 group is not. Claim 1 allows R1 to be a 4-12 membered heteroaryl. The compounds of claim 13 each recite either an O-heteroaryl, ex: PNG media_image2.png 109 183 media_image2.png Greyscale , or no such heteroaryl, ex: PNG media_image3.png 112 217 media_image3.png Greyscale PNG media_image4.png 135 250 media_image4.png Greyscale , in the corresponding R1 position. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a) 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. Claim 1 and its dependent claims 2, 5, 6, 10, 11, 14, and 15 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. Claim 1 is directed to a compound of Formula (I): PNG media_image5.png 157 235 media_image5.png Greyscale , wherein Y is either 4-8 membered heterocyclyl or O-4-8 membered heterocyclyl and R1 is 4-12 membered heteroaryl. Applicant provides no embodied species that fall into the genus of claim 1. The embodiments provided that are most similar to applicant’s compound genus include a heterocycle in the Y position and O-heteroaryl in the R1 position. For example, PNG media_image2.png 109 183 media_image2.png Greyscale . As applicant has not demonstrated possession of the compounds of Formula (I), applicant’s written description is considered inadequate to support claims 1, 2, 5, 6, 10, 11, 14, and 15 as currently written. Applicant will only be considered to have possession of compound of Formula (I) wherein Y is a 4-8 membered heterocyclyl and R1 is O-heterocyclyl or O-4-12 membered heteroaryl. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Anthony Seitz whose telephone number is (703)756-4657. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 AM ET - 5:00 PM ET M-F. 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, Jeffrey Lundgren can be reached at (571)272-5541. 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. /A.J.S./Examiner, Art Unit 1629 /JEFFREY S LUNDGREN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1629
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 29, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599583
SMALL MOLECULE GRB2 STABILIZERS FOR RAS MAP KINASE INHIBITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595263
PYRAZOLOPYRIMIDINE COMPOUND USED AS ATR KINASE INHIBITOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590087
INHIBITING USP36
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590080
NOVEL COMPOUNDS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583861
DERIVATIVES OF IMIDAZO[4,5-d]PYRIDAZINE, THEIR PREPARATION AND THEIR THERAPEUTIC APPLICATION
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
68%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+27.5%)
3y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 158 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