Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/393,205

ALPHA4 BETA7 INEGRIN ANTAGONISTS AND USES THEREOF

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Dec 21, 2023
Priority
Dec 22, 2022 — provisional 63/476,861
Examiner
ONDACHI, PAULINE WANJIKU MUCH
Art Unit
1627
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Xinthera Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 0% of cases
0%
Career Allowance Rate
0 granted / 0 resolved
-60.0% vs TC avg
Minimal +0% lift
Without
With
+0.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
Avg Prosecution
6 currently pending
Career history
4
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
59.1%
+19.1% vs TC avg
§112
18.2%
-21.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 0 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 . Priority Acknowledgement is made of the Application’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e), U.S. Provisional Application Serial No. 63/476861, filed on December 22, 2022. Information Disclosure Statement Two information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on April 8, 2024 and June 26, 2024 are acknowledged and have been considered. Status of the Application Receipt is acknowledged of the Applicant’s invention, Application No. 18/393,205 filed on 21 December 2023. Claims 2-6, 8-11, 13-17, 20-24, 26-29, 31-32, 34, 36-40, 42-43, 46, 48-50, 52-54, 56-57, 59-60, 62-67, 72-82 are cancelled. Claims 1 and 71 are original; and claims 7,12, 18-19, 25, 30, 33, 35, 41, 44-45, 47, 51, 55, 58, 61, 68-70 are amended. No new matter was introduced. Thus claims 1, 7, 12, 18-19, 25, 30, 33, 35, 41, 44-45, 47, 51, 55, 58, 61, 68-71 represent all the claims currently under examination. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112a 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, 7, 12, 18-19, 25, 30, 33, 35, 41, 44-45, 47, 51, 55, 58, 61, 69-71 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 claims contain 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 instant claims are drawn towards a compound of formula (I) with three rings A, B, and C that are connected to form a macrocyclic compound as recited and shown in claim 1. Applicant claims rings A, B and C as aryl or heteroaryl (claim 1). The terms aryl and heteroaryl as understood by a skilled artisan in the field encompass a variety of different aromatic ring sizes, monocyclic or polycyclic, and with different variations / combinations of hetero atoms for the heteroaryls. While the claimed invention broadly claims rings A, B and C as aryl or heteroaryl in claim 1, the specification only discloses examples of compounds with only phenyl rings for ring A and either phenyl or 5-membered heteroaryl for rings B and C ( Specification, Table 1 - pg. 27, and 2 - pg. 49). There is no written description or examples of preparation other variations of ring sizes and/ or combinations of other variations of aryls or heteroaryls as broadly recited in claim 1. Claims 7, 30, 33, 40 and 41 recite these limitations; wherein ring A is phenyl (claim 7), or wherein ring B is phenyl (claim 30), or is 5-membered heteroaryl (claim 33), or wherein ring C is phenyl (claim 40), or 5-membered heteroaryl (claim 41); However, these limitations are dependents of the broad parent claim 1 and specifying wherein one ring is a phenyl or 5-membered heteroaryl does not resolve the fact that the other two rings are still broadly claimed in the parent claim 1. A thorough search of the prior art in the field of alpha4 beta7 integrin antagonists revealed compounds that are targeted towards inhibition of α4β7 generally contain substituted or unsubstituted phenyls, biphenyls and /or heteroaryl rings, which may or may not be cyclized into macrocycles. Thus, there is a wide variation in the kinds of compounds reported as α4β7 integrin inhibitors/ antagonists. For example, Bursavich et al. (WO2021/076890A1, cited in the IDS) discloses α4β7 integrin inhibitors such as; PNG media_image1.png 157 207 media_image1.png Greyscale As seen below, a sample of some compounds reported in the field, confirms that α4β7 integrin inhibitors/ antagonists are very unpredictable in their structures. This affirms the need for a properly written description of applicant’s invention to ascertain that applicant was in possession of the claimed invention at the time of filing and further that the compounds can perform the claimed functions recited in claims 70 and 71. PNG media_image2.png 214 247 media_image2.png Greyscale Bursavich et al. 2019 (WO 2021/200202 A1 PNG media_image3.png 195 216 media_image3.png Greyscale Pgs. 26 & 40 PNG media_image4.png 130 247 media_image4.png Greyscale PNG media_image5.png 106 201 media_image5.png Greyscale Reilly et al. WO 2023/220741 A1 pg. 147 & 150 PNG media_image6.png 212 224 media_image6.png Greyscale Blomgren et al. WO 2021/030438A1 PNG media_image7.png 367 500 media_image7.png Greyscale Boer et al. J. Med. Chem. 2001, 44 (16), 2586-2592 (Abstract) PNG media_image8.png 209 500 media_image8.png Greyscale Dubree et al. J. Med. Chem. 2002, 45(16), 3552-3457 (Abstract) PNG media_image9.png 313 320 media_image9.png Greyscale Vazquez et al. US 2020/016530 A1 (Abstract) PNG media_image10.png 340 904 media_image10.png Greyscale Roughton et al. WO 2022/002781 A1 (Abstract) Additionally, Applicant’s general schemes 1 and 2 in the specification (page 118 -119) are generic, illustrating general methods without sufficient details to perform the illustrated reactions. However, Examiner notes that the Applicant has proper written description in the specification (pages 120-465) for the examples shown in Tables 1 and 2 (page 27 and 49). These compounds show structures wherein ring A is phenyl and rings B and C are either phenyl or 5-membered heteroaryl. Thus, Applicant can overcome this rejection by moving claims 7, 30, 33, 40 and 41 to be part of parent claim 1 as that will fulfill the written description requirement. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 68 is free of prior art. The compounds shown in the claim appear to be novel and are thus allowable. Conclusion Claims 1, 7, 12, 18-19, 25, 30, 33, 35, 41, 44-45, 47, 51, 55, 58, 61, 69-71are rejected. Claim 68 is allowed. Communication Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAULINE ONDACHI whose telephone number is (571)272-9419. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00 am - 5:00 pm 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, Kortney L. Klinkel can be reached at (571)270-5239. 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. /P.O./Examiner, Art Unit 1627 /Kortney L. Klinkel/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1627
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 21, 2023
Application Filed
Jun 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
Grant Probability
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 0 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