Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/574,869

Low-Molecular-Weight HE800 Exopolysaccharide Derivatives with Anti-Cancer Properties and Uses Thereof

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Dec 28, 2023
Examiner
BERRY, LAYLA D
Art Unit
1693
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
INSERM
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
66%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
74%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 66% — above average
66%
Career Allow Rate
939 granted / 1427 resolved
+5.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+8.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
1471
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.7%
-37.3% vs TC avg
§103
34.8%
-5.2% vs TC avg
§102
20.0%
-20.0% vs TC avg
§112
23.3%
-16.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1427 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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. CONTINUING DATA This application is a 371 of PCT/EP2022/068227 07/01/2022 FOREIGN APPLICATIONS EP 21183145.8 07/01/2021 Claims 20-35 are pending. 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. Claim s 20-35 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. A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 20 step (b) and step (c’) recite the broad recitation “between 5,000 and 30,000 g/mol”, and the claim also recites preferably , more preferably , and even more preferably narrower limitations. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims. Claims 21-35 depend from claim 20 and incorporate the same limitations by reference. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim (s) 20-35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karim (FR2871476A1, 20 05 , machine translation ) in view of Colliec-Jouault (EP3146971A1, cited on IDS) . Karim teaches that the native EPS HE800 strain is used as an antitumor agent [0008]. Karim teaches that low molecular weight sulfated polysaccharide derivatives are also used to treat neoplastic pathologies such as sarcomas. Page 16, first paragraph. The sulfated polysaccharide derivatives can be from GY785 or HE 800 [0034]. The low molar mass sulfated polysaccharide derivative of HE800 is called HE 800 DRNS [0027]. Native EPS from HE800 is first depolymerized and then sulfated. Paragraphs [0014] -[ 0015]. The characteristics of HE 800 DRNS are as follows on page 25 of the original document (machine translation obtained from google translate). The molecular weight is about 20,000 g/mol and the degree of sulfation is 34%. Karim suggests but does not exemplify treating cancer in a subject using HE 800 DRNS , and Karim does not teach treatment of different types of cancers or administration along with another anti-cancer agent . Colliec-Jouault teaches a low molecular weight sulfated ex o polysaccharide from marine bacterium GY785 for treatment of cancer. See abstract and [0007] . The product is prepared by depolymerization followed by sulfation [0008]. Cancers to be treated include carcinoma, lymphoma, blastoma, sarcoma, and leukemia, or lung cancer breast cancer, colon cancer, and others [0052]. An additional therapeutic agent can be administered [0054], such as cisplatin (an alkylating agent) or doxorubicin (an intercalating antibiotic) [0056]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to use HE 800 DRNS (a compound obtained by the method of claim 20) for treatment of cancer because Karim suggests it. It would have been further obvious to treat specific cancers and to combine HE 800 DRNS with another anti-cancer agent because a different low- molecular weight sulfated exopolysaccharide from GY785 has been disclosed for use with specific cancers and with other agents. The skilled artisan, when searching for further guidance on using HE 800 DRNS for treating cancer as suggested by Karim, would have looked to Colliec-Jouault because the Colliec-Jouault product is also a low-molecular weight sulfated marine exopolysaccharide useful for treating cancer and because Karim teaches the use of both the HE800 derivative and the GY785 derivative for treating cancer . The skilled artisan would have had a reasonable expectation of success because HE 800 DRNS is disclosed for treatment of cancer generally, and both HE 800 DRNS and the exopolysaccharide taught by Colliec-Jouault are low-molecular weight sulfated exopolysaccharides, obtained from marine bacteria, disclosed for the same purpose by Karim, and taught to be useful for treating cancer. Conclusion No claims are allowed. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT LAYLA D BERRY whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-9572 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT 7:00-3:00 CST, M-F . 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 Scarlett Goon can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-270-5241 . 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. /LAYLA D BERRY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1693
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 28, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 31, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594289
POTENTIATION OF ANTIBIOTIC EFFECT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595508
NUCLEOTIDE CLEAVABLE LINKERS AND USES THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589110
CARBONATED AEROSOL EXTERNAL PREPARATION FOR SKIN
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583883
ASYMMETRIC AUXILIARY GROUP
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577269
CONTINUOUS PROCESS FOR PREPARING THE CRYSTALLINE FORM II OF SOTAGLIFLOZIN
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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
66%
Grant Probability
74%
With Interview (+8.6%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1427 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