DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
2. Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on June 23, 2026 is acknowledged.
3. The election of species requirement is withdrawn. The full scope of the elected group was searched and examined.
4. Claims 33, 43 and 44 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected subject matter. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on June 23, 2026.
Priority
5. Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in CN on November 11, 2021 and June 23, 2026 . It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed certified copies of the foreign applications as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Objections
6. Claims 31, 32, 35, 36,38, 39, 41, 42, 45-47 and 51 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
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.
7. Claim(s) 19, 21-23, 28, 29, 48-50 and 52 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO2020123827. The reference has a publication date of June 18, 2020 which antedates the present claims having an effective filing date of November 11, 2022 and priority claim to foreign applications dated November 11, 2021 and June 7, 2022.
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art
The reference teaches THRB receptor agonist compounds of general structure
PNG
media_image1.png
102
204
media_image1.png
Greyscale
and including specific embodiments such as
PNG
media_image2.png
96
156
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(page 7, compound 9).
The reference teaches pharmaceutical compositions comprising the THRB agonist compounds, in specific amounts, with specific excipients, relevant to claims 21-23, 28, 29 in paragraphs [0033], [0038], [0044], [0045]. The properties recited in claims 48-50 and 52 are inherent and inseparable from the structure of the compound(s).
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue
The claimed compound and composition comprising compound is different from the prior art in that it is a potassium salt while the prior art compound is free base.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art - considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness
One of ordinary skill in the art has the teaching and suggestion in the reference to prepare pharmaceutically acceptable salts, such as potassium salts. See paragraph [0033]. The motivation is to practice the invention more broadly than the specific embodiments. Additionally, pharmaceutically acceptable salts have a reasonable expectation of success in being prepared and used for the same utility. Moreover, the skilled artisan may find that pharmaceutically acceptable salts may have improved properties. For these reasons, the present claims are found to be prima facie obvious over the prior art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUN JAE YOO whose telephone number is (571)272-9074. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8-5.
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.
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.
/SUN JAE YOO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1621
Prosecution Insights