Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 04, 2026
Application No. 18/400,055

LYOPHILIZED PREPARATION OF CYTOTOXIC DIPEPTIDES

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jul 19, 2024
Priority
Apr 28, 2011 — SE 1150371-1 +7 more
Examiner
SEAMAN, D MARGARET M
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Oncopeptides AB
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allowance Rate
1075 granted / 1405 resolved
+16.5% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
46 currently pending
Career history
1424
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.4%
-35.6% vs TC avg
§103
16.0%
-24.0% vs TC avg
§102
19.9%
-20.1% vs TC avg
§112
35.8%
-4.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1405 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: (a) A patent may not be obtained through the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claims 41-57 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Poole in view of Besman and Baheti. The .instant invention is drawn to a lyophilized pharmaceutical composition comprising melphalan flufenamide and trehalose. Poole teaches a freeze-dried melphalan hydrochloride as a two- component composition (see page 2 line 35). Component a) is melphalan hydrochloride which may be prepared using freeze drying procedures well known to those skilled in the art of pharmaceutical formulation (p2 l48). Besman teaches the use of well-known compounds fur use as reconstitution enhancers to lyophilized compositions of hydrophobic anticancer compounds (page 2). This is to be done with compounds that are hydrophobic and insoluble or substantially insoluble in water (pages 2 and 3). Besman teaches a reconstitution enhancer that is preferred enhancers are disaccharides such as trehalose (page 4). Baheti teaches trehalose as common excipients and bulking agents in lyophilized compositions (page 46). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to make a lyophilized formulation of melphalan flufenamide or its derivatives as a HCl salt with trehalan and in a glucose solution. Poole teaches the lyophilization of melphalan flufanamide with other agents and Besman and Baheti teach why trehalan and glucose should be mixed in with the anti-cancer agent for faster solvation in a body. The use of glucose or any other reagent in the claimed invention would have been obvious because glucose is an art-recognized result-effective variable that is routinely determined and optimized in the medicinal arts. Conclusion No claim is allowed. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to D MARGARET M SEAMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-0694. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4pm Eastern. 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, Andrew Kosar can be reached at 571-272-0913. 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. /D MARGARET M SEAMAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1625
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 19, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12747211
METHODS OF MAKING NICOTINIC ACID DERIVATIVES
3y 5m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12741939
COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR TREATING MUSCULAR DYSTROPHIES
3y 6m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12741937
A TAUTOMERIC LIGAND ENABLES BIOMIMETIC C-H HYDROXYLATION WITH MOLECULAR OXYGEN
3y 3m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12692235
FUSED RING COMPOUND AND APPLICATION THEREOF
4y 0m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12692276
TRICYCLIC TRIAZOLO COMPOUNDS AS DGK INHIBITORS
3y 1m to grant Granted Jul 28, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
76%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+8.0%)
2y 2m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1405 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