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 Aug. 3, 2026, the applicants have canceled claims 10, 13 and 16-17; amended claims 1-5, 9, 11-12, 14 and 24 and furthermore, have added new claims 28-30.
Claims 1-9, 11-12, 14-15 and 18-30 are pending in the application. Claims 20-23 and 30 are withdrawn from further consideration as being directed to non-elected subject matter.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed Aug. 3, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive regarding Improper Markush Group Rejection. The applicants have amended claims to overcome enablement and indefiniteness rejections. The examiner also agrees with applicant’s arguments regarding prior art rejection. Regarding Improper Markush Group rejection, the applicants argue that the values of variables A and are amended M to overcome this rejection. This is not true. The applicants have amended value of variable A to overcome this rejection. However, the value of variable M is not amended to overcome this rejection. The common core will be different based on the size, number and types of heteroatoms present in the heteroaryl ring. The applicants are suggested to amend claims to read upon the elected species to overcome this rejection.
Conclusion
The Improper Markush Group rejection of claims 1-3, 5-9, 11-12, 14-15, 18-19 and 25-27 is maintained.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 24 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.
NEW GROUNDS OF REJECTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
7. 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.
Claims 5, 7-8, 12 and 28-29 are 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.
Claims 5, 7-8, 12 and 28-29 recite the limitation "aryl for the value of variable M (variables X, Y and Z represent C)" in claim 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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