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 .
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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election in the reply filed on 17 February 2026, is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Applicants provided a compliant species election of genus formula I from new claim 41:
PNG
media_image1.png
188
448
media_image1.png
Greyscale
, wherein: MTRK is Formula 1-5A, which comprises: R5’ which is methoxy substituted C2alkyl; “n” is 0; Ar3 is fluorine-substituted phenyl; Ar1 is phenyl; R3 is methyl; D3-D4 is
PNG
media_image2.png
110
126
media_image2.png
Greyscale
. The linker moiety ML is -CH2-CH2-; and the degradation tag MDT is Formula 8G:
PNG
media_image3.png
112
194
media_image3.png
Greyscale
.
The elected species is free of the prior art.
The Examiner extended the Markush search to the full scope of instant claim 41 genus formula I but did not find any prior art.
Therefore, the Election of Species Requirement of 6 January 2026, is withdrawn, as all claims are free of the prior art.
All claims have been examined on the merits.
Current Status of 18/555,139
This Office Action is responsive to the amended claims of 12 October 2023.
New claims 41-60 have been examined on the merits.
Priority
The effective filing date is 12 April 2022.
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12 October 2023, is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 41-60 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.
Claim 41 recites the limitation "RLr". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
As drafted, the limitation "RLr" (see page 5/12) lacks antecedent basis as it is not further defined within the claim 41. This renders the metes and bounds of claim 41 undefined (hence rendering claim 41 indefinite under 35 USC 112(b)). The artisan does not know what substituents are represented by variable "RLr" as variable "RLr" is not further defined within claim 41.
The claims 42-60 are similarly rejected as indefinite under 35 USC 112(b) since these claims refer back to claim 41 but do not remedy the rationale underpinning the basis for rejecting claim 41.
Claim 46 recites the limitation "Cl". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
As drafted, the limitation “Cl” renders the metes and bounds of claim 46 undefined rendering claim 46 indefinite under 35 USC 112(b). The “chlorine” substituent listed as embodiment for R4’ of dependent claim 46 is not found as an alternative embodiment for claim 41. Please delete “Cl” from the list of claim 46 to render moot this rejection.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 46 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Dependent claim 46, drawn to “Cl” as an alternative embodiment for R4’ in dependent claim 46, does not further limit the R4’ of claim 41, which is silent as to “Cl”. Thus, claim 46 is rejected under 35 USC 112(d).
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Conclusion
No claims are presently allowable as written.
Claim 41 is free of the prior art.
There is no known prior art reference that either teaches or anticipates a heterobifunctional compound of formula I according to new independent claim 41.
The reference JIANG (Jiang, Fei., et al. “CPD-002, a novel VEGFR2 inhibitor, relieves rheumatoid arthritis by reducing angiogenesis through the suppression of the VEGFR2/PI3K/AKT signaling pathway.” International Immunopharmacology. (2024), 131, 111850), discloses the CPD-002 compound:
PNG
media_image4.png
242
322
media_image4.png
Greyscale
(Fig 1 on page 2).
However, this compound is structurally distinct from the instant formula I. Moreover, the JIANG reference fails to teach, suggest, or anticipate any compound of instant genus formula I.
Moreover, JIANG is published in 2024, which is after the instant application’s effective filing date of 12 April 2022.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN S KENYON whose telephone number is (571)270-1567. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10a-6p.
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, Andrew D Kosar can be reached at (571) 272-0913. 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.
/JOHN S KENYON/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1625
Prosecution Insights