Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/492,484

NOVEL DARPin BASED MULTI-SPECIFIC T-CELL ENGAGERS

Final Rejection §DP
Filed
Oct 23, 2023
Examiner
DONOGHUE, BRITTNEY ERIN
Art Unit
1675
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Molecular Partners AG
OA Round
2 (Final)
61%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 61% of resolved cases
61%
Career Allow Rate
54 granted / 89 resolved
+0.7% vs TC avg
Strong +62% interview lift
Without
With
+61.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
36 currently pending
Career history
125
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.4%
-36.6% vs TC avg
§103
35.0%
-5.0% vs TC avg
§102
12.6%
-27.4% vs TC avg
§112
27.8%
-12.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 89 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 Status The remarks filed 07/31/2025 are acknowledged. Claims 1-24 are pending. Claims 1-3, 7-15, and 19 are amended. Claims 21-24 are new. Claims 17 and 19-20 remain withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention and/or species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 11/18/2024. Therefore, claims 1-16, 18, and 21-24 are under examination. Withdrawn The objection to the specification is withdrawn. Applicant has amended the specification to overcome the objection. The objections to claims 11 and 12 are withdrawn. Applicant has amended the claims to overcome the objections. The rejections of claims 11-14 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) are withdrawn. Applicant has amended the claims to overcome the rejections. The rejections of claims 1-6, 9-10, 15, and 18 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) written description are withdrawn. Applicant has amended claim 1 to overcome the rejections. The rejections of claims 11-13 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) written description are withdrawn. Applicant has amended claim 1 to overcome the rejections. The rejections of claims 1, 3, 5-6, 9-10, and 15 under 35 U.S.C. 102 are withdrawn. Applicant has amended claim 1 to overcome the rejections. The rejections of claims 1-6, 9-10, 15, and 18 under 35 U.S.C. 103 are withdrawn. Applicant has amended claim 1 to overcome the rejections. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/31/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Claim Objections Claims 1-3 and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 recites the limitation “at least two second binding agents”, claim 2 recites “another second binding agent” and claims 3 and 15 make reference to said “second binding agents”. While not indefinite, the language of “at least two second binding agents” is confusing because in a technical sense, these “two second binding agents” would be a second and third binding agent, as claimed in instant claim 1, and the “another second binding agent” would be a fourth binding agent, as set forth in instant claim 2. The Examiner recommends amending the “second binding agent” language to be “additional binding agent”. Appropriate correction is required. Maintained Rejections 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. This rejection has been modified solely to address the claim amendments to claim 1 requiring that one of said second binding agents binds to CD33 and comprising an amino acid sequence that is at least 85% identical to any one of SEQ ID NOs: 15, 67 to 70, 111, and 112, wherein another of said second binding agents specifically binds to CD123 and comprises an amino acid sequence that it is at least 85% identical to any one of SEQ ID NOs: 6, 65, 66, and 102 to 106 and to address newly added claims 21-24. Claims 1-16, 18, and 21-24 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-16, 18, and 20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,834,504 (‘504). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. Regarding claims 1, 6-8, 13, and 21-24 of the instant application, claim 1 of ‘504 teaches a recombinant protein (1) comprising a first binding agent that specifically binds to a protein expressed on the surface of an immune cell, and (2) at least two binding agents that specifically bind to a tumor-associated antigen, wherein said two binding agents specifically bind to different tumor-associated antigens, and wherein said first binding agent is a designed ankyrin repeat domain with binding specificity for CD3, and wherein said ankyrin repeat domain with binding specificity for CD3 comprises an amino acid sequence that is at least 85% identical to any one of the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NOs: 1 to 5, claim 16 of ‘504 teaches the recombinant protein of claim 1, wherein said recombinant protein comprises a polypeptide having the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NO: 95, and claim 12 of ‘504 teaches the recombinant protein of claim 1, wherein said recombinant protein comprises a polypeptide having an amino acid sequence that is at least 80% identical to the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NO: 96. SEQ ID NO: 95 of ‘504 comprises a sequence (i.e. residues 297 to 421 of SEQ ID NO: 95) with 100% sequence identity to SEQ ID NO: 111 of instant claim 1 and also comprises a sequence (i.e. residues 446 to 569 of SEQ ID NO: 95) with 100% sequence identity to SEQ ID NO: 105 of the instant claim. SEQ ID NO: 96 of ‘504 comprises a sequence (i.e. residues 593 to 717 of SEQ ID NO: 96) with 100% sequence identity to SEQ ID NO: 112 of instant claim 1 and also comprises a sequence (i.e. residues 445 to 567 of SEQ ID NO: 96) with 100% sequence identity to SEQ ID NO: 106 of the instant claim. Since the sequences comprised in SEQ ID NO: 95 and SEQ ID NO: 96 of ‘504 are 100% identical to the claimed second binding agents that bind to CD33 and CD123, then SEQ ID NO: 95 and SEQ ID NO: 96 must each comprise two second binding agents that bind to CD33 and CD123 since function flows from structure. See MPEP 2112.01(II). Additionally, SEQ ID NOs: 1 to 5 of ‘504 have 100% sequence identity to SEQ ID NOs: 1 to 5 of instant claims 7 and 8, respectively. Regarding claim 2 of the instant application, claim 2 of ‘504 teaches the recombinant protein of claim 1, wherein said protein comprises at least three binding agents that specifically bind to a tumor-associated antigen, wherein said three binding agents specifically bind to different tumor-associated antigens. Regarding claim 3 of the instant application, claim 3 of ‘504 teaches the recombinant protein of claim 1, wherein said recombinant protein is capable of binding with a lower dissociation constant (KD) to a surface displaying said tumor-associated antigens, when compared to a recombinant protein comprising only one of said binding agents that specifically bind to a tumor-associated antigen. Regarding claim 4 of the instant application, claim 4 of ‘504 teaches the recombinant protein of claim 3, wherein said surface displaying said tumor-associated antigens is the surface of a tumor cell. Regarding claim 5 of the instant application, claim 5 of ‘504 teaches the recombinant protein of claim 1, wherein said protein expressed on the surface of an immune cell is CD3. Regarding claim 9 of the instant application, claim 7 of ‘504 teaches the recombinant protein of claim 1, wherein said recombinant protein binds human CD3 in PBS with a dissociation constant (KD) below 10-6 M. Regarding claim 10 of the instant application, claim 8 of ‘504 teaches the recombinant protein of claim 1, wherein said recombinant protein binds human CD3 with an EC50 ranging from 1 to 400 nM. Regarding claim 11 of the instant application, claim 9 of ‘504 teaches the recombinant protein of claim 1, wherein said recombinant protein comprises a polypeptide having an amino acid sequence that is at least 80% identical to any one of the amino acid sequences of SEQ ID NOs: 11 to 14, 78 to 86 and 95 to 101 and claim 14 of ‘504 teaches the recombinant protein of claim 1, wherein said recombinant protein comprises a polypeptide having the amino acid sequence of any one of SEQ ID NOs: 11 to 14, 78 to 86 and 95 to 101. SEQ ID NOs: 11 to 14, 78 to 86 and 95 to 101 of ‘504 have 100% sequence identity to SEQ ID NOs: 11 to 14, 78 to 86 and 95 to 101 of the instant claim, respectively. Regarding claim 12 of the instant application, claim 10 of ‘504 teaches the recombinant protein of claim 1, wherein said recombinant protein comprises a polypeptide having an amino acid sequence that is at least 80% identical to any one of the amino acid sequences of SEQ ID NOs: 95 to 101 and claim 15 of ‘504 teaches the recombinant protein of claim 1, wherein said recombinant protein comprises a polypeptide having the amino acid sequence of any one of SEQ ID NOs: 95 to 101. SEQ ID NOs: 95 to 101 of ‘504 have 100% sequence identity to SEQ ID NOs: 95 to 101 of the instant claim, respectively. Regarding claim 13 of the instant application, claim 11 of ‘504 teaches the recombinant protein of claim 1, wherein said recombinant protein comprises a polypeptide having an amino acid sequence that is at least 80% identical to the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NO: 95 and claim 16 of ‘504 teaches the recombinant protein of claim 1, wherein said recombinant protein comprises a polypeptide having the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NO: 95. SEQ ID NO: 95 of ‘504 has 100% sequence identity to SEQ ID NO: 95 of the instant claim. Regarding claim 14 of the instant application, claim 12 of ‘504 teaches the recombinant protein of claim 1, wherein said recombinant protein comprises a polypeptide having an amino acid sequence that is at least 80% identical to the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NO: 96. SEQ ID NO: 96 of ‘504 has 100% sequence identity to SEQ ID NO: 96 of the instant claim. Regarding claim 15 of the instant application, claim 13 of ‘504 teaches the recombinant protein of claim 1, wherein said recombinant protein is capable of binding simultaneously to said protein expressed on the surface of an immune cell, which is specifically bound by said first binding agent, and to said tumor-associated antigens, which are specifically bound by said at least two binding agents that specifically bind to a tumor-associated antigen. Regarding claim 16 of the instant application, claim 18 of ‘504 teaches a recombinant protein comprising a polypeptide having the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID NO: 95 or SEQ ID NO: 96. SEQ ID NOs: 95 and 96 of ‘504 has 100% sequence identity to SEQ ID NOs: 96 and 96 of the instant claim, respectively. Regarding claim 18 of the instant application, claim 20 of ‘504 teaches a pharmaceutical composition comprising the recombinant protein of claim 1, and a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier and/or diluent. Response to Arguments The double patenting rejections over U.S. Patent No. 11,834,504 (‘504) are maintained. Applicant did not set forth any arguments against the double patenting rejections nor did Applicant file a Terminal Disclaimer. As such, the double patenting rejections are maintained. Conclusion No claims are allowed. 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 Brittney E Donoghue whose telephone number is (571)272-9883. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 7:30 - 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, Jeffrey Stucker can be reached at (571) 272-0911. 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. /B.E.D./Examiner, Art Unit 1675 /JEFFREY STUCKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1675
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 23, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 10, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §DP
Jul 31, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 03, 2025
Final Rejection — §DP
Apr 02, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595293
Anti-Follicle Stimulating Hormone Receptor Antibodies
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12528851
IL2-BASED THERAPEUTICS AND METHODS OF USE THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12522649
Antibody Purification
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12503509
CLEC12AXCD3 BISPECIFIC ANTIBODIES AND METHODS FOR THE TREATMENT OF DISEASE
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 23, 2025
Patent 12486333
TISSUE PLASMINOGEN ACTIVATOR ANTIBODIES AND METHOD OF USE THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 02, 2025
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
61%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+61.6%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 89 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month