Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/740,078

QUINOLINE DERIVATIVES

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Jun 11, 2024
Examiner
AULAKH, CHARANJIT
Art Unit
1621
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Gilead Sciences Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
65%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
1407 granted / 1741 resolved
+20.8% vs TC avg
Minimal -16% lift
Without
With
+-16.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
54 currently pending
Career history
1795
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.9%
-38.1% vs TC avg
§103
15.2%
-24.8% vs TC avg
§102
21.0%
-19.0% vs TC avg
§112
42.6%
+2.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1741 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 . According to a preliminary amendment filed on Sep. 24, 2024, the applicants have canceled claims 1-99 and furthermore, have added new claims 100 and 101. Claims 100 and 101 are pending in the application. 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 100 and 101 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-11 of U.S. Patent No. 11,116,760, cited on applicant’s form 1449. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to prepare instant compounds with reasonable expectation of success since instant compounds with specific variables are disclosed in claim 1 as well as dependent claims 2-11 of the cited patent. Allowable Subject Matter The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The instant compounds are allowable over the prior art since they are neither disclosed nor obvious over the prior art. In the prior art, Sircar (Bioorg. & Medicinal Chem., cited on applicant’s form 1449) discloses alpha4-beta7 integrin antagonists in tables 1-9 on pages 2054-2057 which are closely related to the instant compounds. However, the compounds disclosed by Sircar differ from the instant compounds in having a monocyclic phenyl ring attached to CH2 group instead of instant bicyclic quinoline ring and furthermore, there is no teaching, suggestion or motivation in the prior art to modify the compounds of Sircar to prepare instant compounds. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARANJIT AULAKH whose telephone number is (571)272-0678. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00-3:30. 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, Clinton A Brooks can be reached on 571-270-7682. 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. /CHARANJIT AULAKH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1621
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 11, 2024
Application Filed
Nov 03, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594251
BENZALKONIUM CHLORIDE FORUSE IN TREATING CONJUNCTIVITIS AND/OR COVID-19
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583829
SALT OF BENZOTHIAZOLE COMPOUND, AND CRYSTAL FORM AND USE THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581852
COMPOUND, LUMINESCENT MATERIAL, DELAYED FLUORESCENT MATERIAL, AND ORGANIC OPTICAL DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12569479
BUPROPION AS A MODULATOR OF DRUG ACTIVITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12564586
KAPPA OPIOD RECEPTOR ANTAGONISTS FOR TREATING PAIN-RELATED SLEEP DISORDERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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
81%
Grant Probability
65%
With Interview (-16.0%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1741 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