Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/435,838

Cathinone Derivatives, Pharmaceutical Formulations, and Methods

Non-Final OA §102§DP
Filed
Feb 07, 2024
Examiner
KOSTURKO, GEORGE W
Art Unit
1621
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
The Corporation of Mercer University
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
54%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 54% of resolved cases
54%
Career Allow Rate
379 granted / 699 resolved
-5.8% vs TC avg
Strong +49% interview lift
Without
With
+49.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
52 currently pending
Career history
751
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.1%
-38.9% vs TC avg
§103
40.3%
+0.3% vs TC avg
§102
17.6%
-22.4% vs TC avg
§112
21.7%
-18.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 699 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §DP
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 . Claims 1-13, file December 01, 2025 are currently pending. CHANGE OF EXAMINER Note that the examiner has changed from Examiner Daniel Carcanague to George Kosturko. Please make all your responses and interview requests to Examiner George Kosturko. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/01/2025 has been entered. Status of Claims As indicated in the Office Action of 04/10/2025, claims 2-8 and 12 were withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim and claim 11 was withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention. Election was made with traverse in the reply filed on 03/13/2025. Claims 1, 9-10 and 13 are the subject matter of this Office Action. Response to Amendment Applicant’s amendments, filed 12/01/2025 is acknowledged. Applicant has amended the genus of R1 for Formulas (I)-(III) as follows: wherein R1 is a C3-C10 hydrocarbyl comprising at least one nitrogen heteroatom, with the proviso that (i) R1 is not pyrrolidin-1-yl in formula (I), (ii) R1 is not an aryl C3- C10 hydrocarbyl in formula (I) and formula (II), (iii) R1 is not a C5 hydrocarbyl that forms an 8-methyl-8-azabicyclo[3,2.1]octan-3-yl in formula (III), (iv) R1 is not a C6 hydrocarbyl that forms an octahydro-2H-quinolizin-2-yl in formula (III), (v) the at least one nitrogen heteroatom is the only heteroatom of R1 unless R1 includes an epoxy moiety, [[and ]](vi) R1 does not include an amide, and (vii) R1 is a bicyclo C3-C10 hydrocarbyl in formula (III);wherein when R1 comprises a cyclic group in formula (I), an atom of the cyclic group is directly bonded to the alpha carbon; wherein R2, R3, R4, R5, and R6 are independently selected from the group consisting of hydrogen, methyl, methoxy, hydroxy, a first halogen, and a C1-C6 hydrocarbyl comprising a covalent bond between R2 and R3, R3 and R4, R4 and R5, or R5 and R6; wherein X is selected from the group consisting of hydrogen, methyl, ethyl, hydroxy, and a second halogen; In view of Applicant’s amendments, the pending 35 U.S.C 102(a)(1) rejection of claims 1, 10 and 13 by Giovannini (SynLett 1996 pages 1001-1003) is withdrawn. In addition, the pending 35 U.S.C 102(a)(1) rejection of claims 1, 9-10 and 13 by Duncan (J. Med. Chem Vol. 13 pages 1-6 published 1970) is also withdrawn. Applicant's arguments, filed 01/22/2013 have been fully considered. Rejections and/or objections not reiterated from the previous Office Action are hereby withdrawn. The following rejections and/or objections are either reiterated or newly applied. They constitute the complete set of rejections and objections presently being applied to the instant application. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1, 10 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lutz (J. Org. Chem. Vol. 12 pages 617-703 published 1947). Lutz (J. Org. Chem. Vol. 12 pages 617-703 published 1947) teaches compounds of Formula (I). Embraced within the teachings of Lutz is compound XXXVB which comprises the following structural limitations: R2, R3, R5 and R6 are each independently H, R4 is halogen, R1 is a C5 hydrocarbyl with one nitrogen (piperidine) and X is CH3 (page 650). PNG media_image1.png 271 616 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 10, Lutz teaches formulating said compound as a pharmaceutical composition further comprising the pharmaceutically acceptable carrier in a assay to identify the potency of said compound on inhibiting malaria pathogenesis (pages 653-654). Regarding claim 13, R1 is not an 8-methyl-8-azabicyclo[3.2.1]octanyl ring. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 1, 9-10 and 13 remain rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-9 and 11-42 of U.S. Patent No. 11,912,705. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the following. Claims 1-9 and 11-42 of U.S. Patent 11,912,705 embrace compounds of Formulas (I)-(III) which include the following compound PNG media_image2.png 125 152 media_image2.png Greyscale Which reads on the following claimed limitations: R2-R6 are each independently H, R1 is a C5 hydrocarbyl with one nitrogen (piperidine) and X is OH (claims 1, 5). Claims 11, 15-16 and 39-42 of U.S. Patent 11,902,705 embrace compounds of Formula (III) wherein R1 is bicyclo C3-C10 hydrocarbyl. Conclusion In view of the rejections set forth above, no claim is allowed. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GEORGE W KOSTURKO whose telephone number is (571)270-5903. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:30. 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. /GEORGE W KOSTURKO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1621
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 07, 2024
Application Filed
Apr 06, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §DP
Jul 09, 2025
Response Filed
Jul 27, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §DP
Oct 06, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 01, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 05, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595237
LAMOTRIGINE HYDRATE CRYSTAL FORM, PREPARATION METHOD THEREFOR, AND COMPOSITION CONTAINING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589094
CONCOMITANT ADMINISTRATION OF GLUCOCORTICOID RECEPTOR MODULATOR RELACORILANT AND PACLITAXEL, A DUAL SUBSTRATE OF CYP2C8 AND CYP3A4
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12577217
15-PGDH INHIBITOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12576088
Methods for Enhancing Cytotoxic Cancer Therapy Through Inhibition of ATG4B
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12570679
STAT3 PROTEIN DEGRADERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
54%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+49.1%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 699 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