Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/758,783

METHODS OF TREATING IDIOPATHIC PULMONARY FIBROSIS WITH DEUPIRFENIDONE

Non-Final OA §102§DP
Filed
Jun 28, 2024
Priority
Jan 05, 2022 — provisional 63/296,818 +15 more
Examiner
ROZOF, TIMOTHY R
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Puretech Lyt 100 Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allowance Rate
697 granted / 960 resolved
+12.6% vs TC avg
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+24.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 0m
Avg Prosecution
49 currently pending
Career history
992
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.0%
-39.0% vs TC avg
§103
23.8%
-16.2% vs TC avg
§102
27.9%
-12.1% vs TC avg
§112
21.2%
-18.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 960 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §DP
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 . DETAILED ACTION This is a response to Applicant’s communication filed on August 14, 2025. Application No. 18./758,783, filed June 28, 2024, is a U.S. Nonprovisional application, which is a Continuation of PCT/US2023/060185, filed January 5, 2023, and claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional applications Nos.: 63/432,208, filed December 13, 2022; 63/431,530, filed December 9, 2022; 63/403,481, filed September 2, 2022; 63/374,362, filed September 1, 2022; 63/356,653, filed June 29, 2022; 63/352,107, filed June 14, 2022; 63/341,828, filed May 13, 2022; 63/341,281, filed May 12, 2022; 63/341,269, filed May 12, 2022; 63/341,279, filed May 12, 2022; 63/326,129, filed March 21, 2022; 63/326,132, filed March 31, 2022; 63/296,843, filed January 5, 2022; 63/296,818, filed January 5, 2022; and 63/296,826, filed January 5, 2022. Claim 1 is pending. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102(a)(1) The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Gant et al., U.S. Patent No. 8,680,123, (citing the CAS abstract for the compounds disclosed therein). Gant discloses a method for treating Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis (IPF), the method comprising orally administering to a subject in need thereof a total daily dose of 250-2500 mg of a deuterium-enriched pirfenidone: PNG media_image1.png 183 278 media_image1.png Greyscale . (citing Gant et al., US ‘123 patent, Col. 13, ln. 25, for the deuterated compound depicted above; see Id., Abstract, for the method of use, as well as Id., Col. 1, ln. 10 – Col. 26, FIELD, for methods of treating Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis; furthermore, see Id., Col. 21, ln. 4-54 for compositions and dosages of the individual compositions; and see Id., Col. 22, ln. 21-31, for the suggested administration protocols for daily doses. 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. Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-6 of U.S. Patent No. 12,622,899. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the ‘899 patent claim the same subject matter claimed by the present invention. Conclusion No claims are allowed. Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY R ROZOF whose telephone number is (571)270-5992. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 a.m. -5:00 p.m.. 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, Andrew Kosar can be reached at (571) 272-0913. 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. /TIMOTHY R ROZOF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1625
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 28, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 03, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12679843
PYRROLOPYRIMIDINE AMINES AS COMPLEMENT INHIBITORS
2y 10m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12661359
THERAPEUTIC COMBINATIONS OF ROSUVASTATIN AND RESMETIROM FOR THE TREATMENT OF LIVER DISORDERS OR LIPID DISORDERS
2y 10m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12662462
SALTS OF PYRIDINYLMETHYLENEPIPERIDINE DERIVATIVES AND USES THEREOF
2y 12m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12649744
N-(PYRIDIN-2-YL)-6,7,8,9-TETRAHYDRO-5H-5,8-EPIMINOCYCLOHEPTA[C]PYRIDINE-10-CARBOXAMIDE DERIVATIVES AND SIMILAR COMPOUNDS AS GPR65 MODULATORS FOR THE TREATMENT OF CANCER
2y 12m to grant Granted Jun 09, 2026
Patent 12649748
WEE1 INHIBITOR AND USE THEREOF
2y 8m to grant Granted Jun 09, 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
73%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+24.0%)
2y 0m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 960 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