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 .
According to paper filed on June 18, 2026, the applicants have canceled claims 9 and 15 and furthermore, have amended claims 1, 6, 10-12 and 17.
Claims 1-8, 10-14 and 16-17 are pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 18, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive regarding indefiniteness rejection of claim 13, both prior art rejections and provisional ODP rejection. The applicants have amended claims to overcome all other rejections and objections. Regarding indefiniteness rejection of claim 13, the applicants argue on page 10 that scope is clear. The examiner does not agree with this argument. The claim must recite specific disease conditions being treated by the instant compounds. Regarding both prior art rejections, the applicants argue on pages 11-15 that the instant compounds are different than those of the two cited references. The examiner does not agree with these arguments. In both of these references, ring A represents 3-azabicyclo [3.1.1] heptane (see RN 274928-06-7 for compound of WO 2021/233428 A1) which is identical to instant A variable. In regard to provisional ODP rejection, the examiner does not agree with applicant’s arguments on page 16 that the compounds of the cited application are distinct from the instant compounds. Actually, the compounds of the cited application anticipate the instant claims when variable R3 represents oxygen containing alkyl group.
Conclusion
The indefiniteness rejection of claim 13 under 35 U.S.C. 112, 2nd paragraph is maintained.
The prior art rejection of claims 1, 2, 6-8, 10-14 and 16 under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) over Quanpeng (WO 2021/233428 A1) is maintained.
The prior art rejection of claims 1, 2, 6-7 and 12 under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) over Li (CN 112778274A) is maintained.
The provisional ODP rejection of claims 1,2 6-8, 12-14 and 16 over claims 1-5 and 8-12 of application 19/265,559 is maintained.
NEW GROUNDS OF REJECTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
9. 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 17 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.
In claim 17, the values of variables n and m are not defined.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-5 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.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARANJIT AULAKH whose telephone number is (571)272-0678. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00-3:30.
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, Clinton A Brooks can be reached at 571-270-7682. 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.
/CHARANJIT AULAKH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1621
Prosecution Insights