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. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 5/14/24 was filed in a timely manner. The submission 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 appl icant regards as his invention. Claims 21, 22, 58 and 67 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. Regarding claim 21, the phrase "such as" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Claims 22, 58 and 67 are dependent from claim 21 and thus also indefinite. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness . Claim (s) 1-10, 21, 22, 32, 43, 56-58 and 67-69 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combined disclosures of Panchenko et al (Synthesis, structure and metal ion coordination of novel benzodiazamacrocyclic ligands bearing pyridyl and picolinate pendant side-arms, New J Chem, 2019, 43, page. 15072-15086) in view of Bibich et al (US 2020/0157087 A1 hereaft e r Babich ) . Panchenko disclo s es a compound , which meets the limitation o f claim 1 , 3 , and 32 when Z1 is H, Z2 is OH and Z3 is H and where W5-9 are H and α is 0 (Scheme 1) . A variation of this compound include metal radiolabels such as Cd2+ or ZN2+ (Scheme 3) , meeting some limitations of claims 10 , 21 and 43. While Panchenko discloses a macrocyclic compound meeting the limitations of Formula (I)claim 1, the reference is silent to the pendant modifications of Formula I-B, C, D, E, F and Formula (II). However a metallic radiolabel is disclosed for use in the compound meeting at least the radiolabel limitations of Formula II. The use of these modified pendant pyridyl and picolinate arms that are attached to the amine nitrogen arms of the macrocycle are known in the art as seen in the Babich patent. Babich discloses modified macrocycle compounds useful in targeting radiotherapy (abstract). The compounds are useful in treating or targeting cancer and/or prostate specific membrane antigen (abstract) , meeting limitations of claim 58 and 68 . Compounds such as along with a metallic radiolabeled version are disclosed [0100-0109]. Further embodiments for Formula I-B, I-C, I-D, I-E and disclosed [Table 2]. Also disclosed is where R26 can comprise an antibody, binding peptide [0128], meeting limitations of claim 21. Further antibodies attached to R26 include belimumab, mogamulizumab and cixutumab [Table A, 0135], meeting limitations of claim 22. The various compounds can be combined into a pharmaceutical formulation comprising carrier and excipients for delivery [0205-0208], meeting limitations of claims 56-58. The formulations are useful in method of treating a subject comprising administering the compound in targeted radiotherapy [0205], meeting the limitations of claims 67-69. It would hav been obvious to modify the pendant arms of Pach e nko as seen in the Babich as they have similar structure and can solve the same problems. With these aspects in mind it would have been obvious to combine the prior art in order to form a compound useful in radiotherapy. It would have been useful to modify the macrocyclic ligand of Panchenko as seen in Babich as they solve the same problem of forming compounds that produce analytical signal upon binding and have similar structures. There would have been a reasonable expectation of success as the pendant arms are similar and are bound to the macrocycle at the same amine nitrogen locations. One of ordinary skill int heart would have been motivated to combine the prior art with expected result of a stable radiolabel useful in treating cancers including prostate cancer. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT MICAH PAUL YOUNG whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-0608 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday through Friday, 9:00 am to 5:30 pm . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Michael Hartley can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 5712720616 . 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. /MICAH PAUL YOUNG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1618