Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 06, 2026
Application No. 18/586,033

BLOCK COPOLYMERS

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Feb 23, 2024
Priority
Jul 30, 2013 — provisional 61/860,136 +6 more
Examiner
KELLY, ROBERT M
Art Unit
1638
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Genevant Sciences GmbH
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
5m
Est. Remaining
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allowance Rate
681 granted / 924 resolved
+13.7% vs TC avg
Strong +25% interview lift
Without
With
+24.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
56 currently pending
Career history
962
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.5%
-35.5% vs TC avg
§103
19.0%
-21.0% vs TC avg
§102
16.0%
-24.0% vs TC avg
§112
43.2%
+3.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 924 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 . Claim 21-38 are pending as amended 6/12/24 and are considered herein. Formalities: The IDS of 10/22/24 and references therein have been considered. A signed copy of the IDS is provided herewith. The drawings of 2/23/24 are accepted. The specification of 2/23/24 is accepted. Applicant’s priority is noted to be: PNG media_image1.png 114 628 media_image1.png Greyscale Double Patenting U.S. Patent Nos. 9,867,885, 10,646,582 were considered for NSDP rejections, however, the Formula 1 block copolymer contains copolymer B containing B1 through B4 monomers, while the present claim consists of B1 through B3 monomers and thus, there is no common subject matter. U.S. Patent No. 11,938,191 was considered for NSDP rejections, however, the claims of the patent require T1 to be a targeting moiety, which is defined in the specification (paragraph 27) as being a moiety specifically binding a cell surface target, and the presently claimed “absent or hydrogen” would not so-bind. Thus, there is no common subject matter claimed. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 21-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. (For purposes of simplicity, the Examiner will refer to the present Application’s publication, 2024/0325552.) Claims 21 and 31 each contain a structure where T1 is absent or a hydrogen, and in the context that L1 is absent or a linking moiety. At no point does the specification teach that T1 is a hydrogen, or why it is a hydrogen. There is simply no such teaching. In addition, when L1 is a linking moiety, it is because there is a T1 present, which is taught to be a targeting moiety (e.g., paragraph 9). In addition a targeting moiety is a complex structure capable of specifically binding to a cell surface molecule (e.g., paragraph 88). If T1 is a hydrogen, it is not a targeting moiety, as such is not specific for a cell surface molecule, and then no L1 is required to link it to the rest of the molecule. At best then, the hydrogen, in the context of a linking moiety, the linking moiety is present as long as it has a hydrogen on it. However, then the linking moiety is not required, as it is required to attach the targeting moiety. The Art teaches chemistry as is well known in the art, but provides no reason for a hydrogen attached to a linking moiety, beyond the attachment of anything to the rest of the structure. Therefore, the Artisan would not have understood Applicant to have been in possession of embodiments where T1 is a hydrogen or the presence of L1 at all in these instances of T1 being absent or being a hydrogen. Claims free of the Art of Record The claims are free of the art of record. To wit, while many disclosures talk about block copolymers of various elements, none provide the specific elements as claimed presently, and thus, given the variety distinct elements and blocks, the specific ones claimed herein are obvious over the art. For example, U.S. Patent Publication No. 2011/0305660 to Stayton, et al., provides may polymers that are close but do not have the same structure combinations for the polymers as presently claimed (e.g., Formula IIA). Conclusion No claim is allowed. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT M KELLY whose telephone number is (571)272-0729. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8a-5p. 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, Tracy Vivlemore can be reached at 571-272-2914. 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. ROBERT M. KELLY Examiner Art Unit 1638 /ROBERT M KELLY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1638
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 23, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 24, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12697309
IMPROVED MRNA-LOADED LIPID NANOPARTICLES AND PROCESSES OF MAKING THE SAME
4y 7m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12691179
SOMATOSTATIN RECEPTOR-BASED CANCER THERAPY
3y 6m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12673073
FASL-ENGINEERED BIOMATERIALS WITH IMMUNOMODULATORY FUNCTION
3y 5m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12672644
MICE EXPRESSING HUMANIZED FC ALPHA RECEPTORS
3y 0m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12642817
Nanoparticle Modification of Human Adipose-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells for Treating Brain Cancer and Other Neurological Diseases
3y 5m to grant Granted Jun 02, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
74%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+24.8%)
2y 10m (~5m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 924 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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