Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/569,867

BENZOXAZINONE DERIVATIVES

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Dec 13, 2023
Examiner
COUGHLIN, MATTHEW P
Art Unit
1626
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Medshine Discovery Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
71%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 71% — above average
71%
Career Allow Rate
702 granted / 984 resolved
+11.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+12.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
48 currently pending
Career history
1032
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.7%
-38.3% vs TC avg
§103
24.9%
-15.1% vs TC avg
§102
20.4%
-19.6% vs TC avg
§112
30.3%
-9.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 984 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . DETAILED ACTION Claims 17-36 are pending in the application. Claims 18 and 35 are rejected. Claim 36 is objected to. Claims 17 and 19-34 are allowed. Priority This application is a 35 U.S.C. 371 National Stage Filing of International Application No. PCT/CN2022/098750, filed June 14th, 2022, which claims priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a-d) to CN202110661381.8, CN202111341577.5, CN202210421052.0, and CN202210626997.6, filed June 15th, 2021, November 12th, 2021, April 20th, 2022 and June 2nd, 2022. Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file. Information Disclosure Statement The Examiner has considered the Information Disclosure Statement(s) filed on January 22nd, 2024. Claim Objections The phrase “selected from” should be added before the colon in line 2 of claim 36. Claim 36 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate of claim 30. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m). Claim 36 only recites the stereochemical permutations of the structures recited in claim 30 such that any embodiment embraced by claim 30 is also embraced by claim 36 and vice versa. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(d) 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 18 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. Every structure falling with the scope of parent claim 17 falls within the scope of dependent claim 18. For instance, the first two structures of claim 18 represent the only two alternatives for formula (II), i.e. that R1 is one of two options. The final four structures of claim 18 similarly represent the four permutations between the definition of R1 and a stereocenter. 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. Claim 35 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. Every structure falling with the scope of parent claim 34 falls within the scope of dependent claim 35. For instance, the first two structures of claim 35 represent the only two alternatives for formula (I), i.e. that R1 is one of two options. The final four structures of claim 35 similarly represent the four permutations between the definition of R1 and a stereocenter. 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. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 17 and 19-34 are allowed. The closest prior art is WO 2016/001631 A1 that teaches compounds of the following general formula: PNG media_image1.png 251 240 media_image1.png Greyscale . The prior art compounds contain a carbonyl between the two rings whereas the corresponding carbon of the instant formula is substituted by R5 and R6 that are not permitted to form a carbonyl. The broadest disclosure only provides for a carbonyl at the corresponding position, and the prior art provides insufficient guidance or motivation regarding why the broadest disclosure should be modified to arrive at any compounds instantly claimed. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW P COUGHLIN whose telephone number is (571)270-1311. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10 am - 6 pm EST. 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, Renee Claytor can be reached at 571-272-8394. 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. /MATTHEW P COUGHLIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1626
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 13, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 11, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600706
METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING LOW-VISCOSITY HARDENER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600708
PRODRUG COMPOUNDS OF 3,4-METHYLENEDIOXYMETHAMPHETAMINE (MDMA) AND METHODS OF SYNTHESIZING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12577236
NOVEL PROCESSES FOR PREPARATION OF TEZACAFTOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577220
METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING (2,2-DIMETHYL-1,3-DIOXOLAN-4-YL)METHANOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12559503
ANTHELMINTIC AZA-BENZOTHIOPHENE AND AZA-BENZOFURAN COMPOUNDS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
71%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+12.2%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 984 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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