Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/583,389

METHOD FOR THE PROPHYLAXIS OR TREATMENT OF CORONAVIRUS INFECTION USING AN IMMUNOMODULATOR AND VACCINE COMPOSITIONS COMPRISING THE SAME

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Feb 21, 2024
Examiner
KINSEY WHITE, NICOLE ERIN
Art Unit
1672
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Advagene Biopharma Co. Ltd.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
58%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
74%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 58% of resolved cases
58%
Career Allow Rate
493 granted / 858 resolved
-2.5% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+16.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
890
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.2%
-36.8% vs TC avg
§103
31.8%
-8.2% vs TC avg
§102
18.3%
-21.7% vs TC avg
§112
29.3%
-10.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 858 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/29/2025 has been entered. Withdrawn Rejections The rejection of claims 14 and 17 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fisher (WO 2012/145491; published October 26, 2012) has been withdrawn in view of applicant’s amendment to claim 14 to delete the phrase “or a pattern recognition receptor (PRR) agonist or antagonist”. Specification The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. 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 14, 16 and 17 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 7 of copending Application No. 18/374118 (reference application). The instant claims are directed to a method of inducing IFNα production in epithelial cells of a subject, comprising administering to the epithelial cells of the subject a therapeutically effective amount of an immunomodulator, wherein the immunomodulator is a detoxified Escherichia coli labile toxin (LT) or Vaxfectin. The copending claims are directed to a method for vaccinating a subject against a mucosal virus infection, comprising administering to the subject an immunologically effective amount of an intranasal booster, wherein the intranasal booster comprises detoxified Escherichia coli labile toxin (LT) and an antigen from the mucosal virus, and wherein the subject has been previously primed, where wherein the detoxified Escherichia coli labile toxin (LT) is LTh(αK). The nasal passages are part of the respiratory tract, and because the copending claims teach the same active steps of claim 14, the method of the copending claims will also induce IFNα production in the epithelial cells present in the nasal passages. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. Claims 14, 16 and 17 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of copending Application No. 17/440546 (reference application). The instant claims are directed to a method of inducing IFNα production in epithelial cells of a subject, comprising administering to the epithelial cells of the subject a therapeutically effective amount of an immunomodulator, wherein the immunomodulator is a detoxified Escherichia coli labile toxin (LT) or Vaxfectin. The copending claims are directed to a method of modulating a mucosal immune response, comprising: administering an antigen to a sublingual mucosa or an oral mucosa of a subject in need thereof, and administering an immunomodulator to an intranasal mucosa of said subject, wherein the antigen is an immunogen, and the immunomodulator is mutated Escherichia coli heat-labile enterotoxoid (LTh(αK)). The nasal passages are part of the respiratory tract, and because the copending claims teach the same active step of claim 14, the method of the copending claims will also induce IFNα production in the epithelial cells present in the nasal passages. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. Response to Arguments In the reply dated 12/29/2025, applicant requests that the double patenting rejections be held in abeyance. The double patenting rejections are maintained. Conclusion No claim is allowed. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nicole Kinsey White whose telephone number is (571)272-9943. The examiner can normally be reached M to Th 6:30 am to 6:00 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, Thomas Visone can be reached at 571-270-0684. 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. /NICOLE KINSEY WHITE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1672
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 21, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 23, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §DP
Jun 27, 2025
Response Filed
Jul 23, 2025
Final Rejection — §DP
Dec 29, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 06, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 22, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12589145
SYSTEMS TO PRODUCE B CELLS GENETICALLY MODIFIED TO EXPRESS SELECTED ANTIBODIES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584917
RECOMBINANT ANTIBODIES, KITS COMPRISING THE SAME, AND USES THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12584147
RATIONAL POLYPLOID ADENO-ASSOCIATED VIRUS VECTORS FOR THE TREATMENT OF DISEASE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12571000
DIAPHRAGM-SPECIFIC NUCLEIC ACID REGULATORY ELEMENTS AND METHODS AND USE THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12560603
Self-Contained Apparatus and System for Detecting Microorganisms
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
58%
Grant Probability
74%
With Interview (+16.2%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 858 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