Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 21, 2026
Application No. 18/541,705

CHELATE COMPOUNDS

Non-Final OA §DOUBLEPATENT
Filed
Dec 15, 2023
Priority
Jun 20, 2016 — GB 1610738.5 +2 more
Examiner
BAEK, JONGHWAN NMN
Art Unit
1618
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
GE HEALTHCARE Limited
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
50%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
50%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 50% of resolved cases
50%
Career Allowance Rate
3 granted / 6 resolved
-10.0% vs TC avg
Minimal +0% lift
Without
With
+0.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
68 currently pending
Career history
61
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.1%
-36.9% vs TC avg
§103
41.3%
+1.3% vs TC avg
§102
10.2%
-29.8% vs TC avg
§112
26.5%
-13.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 6 resolved cases

Office Action

§DOUBLEPATENT
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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I and species of Mn Chelate 5 in the reply filed on September 11, 2026 is acknowledged. Claim Objections Claims 47 and 57 are objected to because of the following informalities: Regarding claim 47, “…cheland Regarding claim 57, “a enantiomerically -enriched mixture” should read “an enantiomerically-enriched mixture.” Appropriate correction is required. 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 45-47 and 56-62 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 30 of copending Application No. 19/555,480. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. Claim 30 of the ‘480 recites a composition comprising a compound of formula (R,S)-Mn Chelate-5 and a pharmaceutically acceptable excipient. The claim of the ‘480 recites an identical compound to that of the instant claims, and stereoisomers such as a racemic mixture, an enantiomerically-enriched mixture, and a diastereomerically pure form of instant claims are obvious variants. See MPEP § 2144.09. Additionally, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to select a proper pharmaceutically acceptable excipient according to the specific requirements of the intended application such as mammalian administration. Selecting a proper excipient would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art as a matter of routine optimization. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONG HWAN BAEK whose telephone number is (571)272-0670. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Thu, 9 am - 3 pm ET. 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, Michael G Hartley can be reached at 571-272-0616. 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. /JONG HWAN BAEK/Examiner, Art Unit 1618 /Michael G. Hartley/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1618
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 15, 2023
Application Filed
Oct 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DOUBLEPATENT (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12721910
METHOD FOR TREATING CANCEROUS TISSUE WITH A NANOTHERAPEUTIC
3y 1m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12721911
METHODS FOR PREPARING NANOTHERAPEUTIC COMPOSITIONS
3y 1m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 2 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
50%
Grant Probability
50%
With Interview (+0.0%)
2y 10m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 6 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