Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/541,560

Methods and Compositions to Inhibit Symptoms Associated with Viral Upper Respiratory Tract Infections

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Dec 15, 2023
Priority
Jun 16, 2017 — provisional 62/520,857 +2 more
Examiner
HOWELL, THEODORE R
Art Unit
1628
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Sen-Jam Pharmaceutical Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allowance Rate
678 granted / 1016 resolved
+6.7% vs TC avg
Strong +26% interview lift
Without
With
+25.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
56 currently pending
Career history
1071
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.9%
-39.1% vs TC avg
§103
44.9%
+4.9% vs TC avg
§102
9.7%
-30.3% vs TC avg
§112
6.4%
-33.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1016 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
DETAILED ACTION The amendment submitted on May 19, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-6, 9-13, and 20-30 are pending in the application and are rejected for the reasons set forth below. No claim is allowed, although the application would be allowable if a terminal disclaimer were to be submitted, as discussed below. 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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, drawn to a method of inhibiting the symptoms associated with the common cold, in the reply filed on May 19, 2026 is acknowledged. All of the pending claims correspond to the elected invention, with claims drawn to the other invention having been cancelled by amendment. 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 possi-ble 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 provi-sions 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 accompa-nied 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 that 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 1-6, 9-13, and 20-30 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-14 of U.S. Patent No. 11,883,388 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. Claim 1 of the ‘388 Patent, of which the present application is a continuation, is directed, in pertinent part, to a method of inhibiting the symptoms associated with viral upper respiratory tract infection by administering, before viral upper respiratory tract symptoms appear, a pharmaceutical composi-tion that consists of an NSAID and a co-agent selected from fexofenadine, ketotifen, and desloratadine. Dependent claims of the ‘388 Patent are directed to various different NSAIDS, dosage forms, and so forth. On the other hand, the instant claims are drawn to a method of administering the same active ingredients “at the first appearance of at least one symptom of the viral upper respiratory infection.” See, e.g., instant claim 1. The time of administration is therefore different: The ‘388 Patent claims administering “before viral upper respiratory tract symptoms appear,” whereas the instant claims require administration “at least at the first appearance” of symptoms. One would have understood, however, that the two modes of administration are prima facie obvious variants of the same invention. See, e.g., the ‘388 Patent at col. 2, ll. 27-41. See also MPEP 804(II)(B)(1). The instant claims are therefore prima facie obvious over the subject matter claimed in the ‘388 Patent. The examiner suggests a terminal disclaimer. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Theodore R. Howell whose telephone number is (571)270-5993. The exam-iner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 8:00 am - 7:00 pm (Eastern Time). 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, Amy L. Clark can be reached at (571)272-1310. 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. THEODORE R. HOWELL Primary Examiner Art Unit 1628 /THEODORE R. HOWELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1628 June 12, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 15, 2023
Application Filed
Jun 16, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12637436
METABOTROPIC GLUTAMATE RECEPTOR NEGATIVE ALLOSTERIC MODULATORS (NAMS) AND USES THEREOF
3y 9m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12617775
PROCESSES OF MAKING CSF-1R INHIBITORS AND METHODS OF USE THEREOF
8m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Patent 12612392
COMPOUND, PHARMACEUTICAL COMPOSITIONS CONTAINING SAME, SYNTHESIS METHOD THEREFOR AND USE THEREOF
9m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12595248
PRMT5 INHIBITORS
3y 10m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594282
USE OF SMALL MOLECULE COMPOUNDS IN THE TREATMENT OF DISEASES MEDIATED BY LUNG EPITHELIAL CELL INJURY AND/OR VASCULAR ENDOTHELIAL CELL INJURY
3y 7m to grant Granted Apr 07, 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
67%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+25.5%)
2y 7m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1016 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