Prosecution Insights
Last updated: September 17, 2026
Application No. 18/763,849

SYNERGIES OF 1- BETA-CARYOPHYLLENE, CANNABIDIOL AND TRIBUTYRIN; 2- RETINYL PALMITATE, BETA-CARYOPHYLLENE AND CANNABIDIOL; 3- RETINYL PALMITATE AND BETA-CARYOPHYLLENE IN CONTROLING INFLAMMATION, METABOLIC HEALTH, INSULIN SENSITIVITY/ GLYCEMIC - GLUCOSE UPTAKE & MANAGEMENT, AND FATTY LIVER/ NAFLD

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Jul 03, 2024
Priority
Jan 05, 2022 — provisional 63/296,642 +1 more
Examiner
SHAMEEM, GOLAM M
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Flg Sciences LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allowance Rate
774 granted / 893 resolved
+26.7% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+16.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 10m
Avg Prosecution
48 currently pending
Career history
910
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.8%
-37.2% vs TC avg
§103
5.0%
-35.0% vs TC avg
§102
18.3%
-21.7% vs TC avg
§112
24.0%
-16.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 893 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 . DETAILED ACTION Priority PNG media_image1.png 36 366 media_image1.png Greyscale , is acknowledged. Status of Claims Claims 1-20 are currently pending in the application. Receipt is acknowledged of amendment / response filed on July 14, 2026 and that has been entered. Information Disclosure Statement Receipt is acknowledged of Information Disclosure Statement (IDS), filed on 01/29/2026, which has been entered in the file. Response to Election/Restriction In response to the restriction requirement, Applicants have elected Group I, which includes claims 1-8 drawn to a method of treating an inflammatory condition comprising : PNG media_image2.png 130 552 media_image2.png Greyscale , is acknowledged. Because Applicants did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.03(a). Therefore, the requirement for restriction is still deemed proper made it final. Claims 9-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 C.F.R. 1.142 (b) as being drawn to a non-elected subject matter. Therefore, the requirement for restriction is still deemed proper and made it final. Applicants preserve their right to file a divisional on the non-elected subject matter. 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 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, 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(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The expressions a method for treating an “inflammatory condition” (claim 1, line 1, page 1, and all other occurrences, if any) and “Neurodegenerative conditions” (claim 8, line 1, page 2, and all other occurrences of claims 1-8, if any), which broaden the enabling disclosure because it is unclear what kind of “inflammatory condition” and “Neurodegenerative conditions” the Applicant is intending to encompass with these broad expressions, since any “inflammatory condition” and “Neurodegenerative conditions” [such as, metabolic health / insulin resistance, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, pulmonary dysfunction, renal dysfunction, cognitive disorders, Alzheimer’s disease / dementia, Parkinson’s disease, Huntington’s disease and motor neuron dysfunction etc.] may fall within the broad definition of “inflammatory condition” and “Neurodegenerative conditions” class. The above expressions, which are not described in such a way as to satisfy the statutory requirements within the purview of 35 U.S.C. 112 first paragraph and therefore, the specification fails to provide sufficient support to treat all the wide range of “inflammatory condition” and “Neurodegenerative conditions” and the method comprising PNG media_image2.png 130 552 media_image2.png Greyscale thereof. The type or mode of action and functionality (structure / function relationship) of preventable or treatable “inflammatory condition” and “Neurodegenerative conditions” are not defined in the claims or anywhere in the specification so as to ascertain the scope and breadth of the claimed subject matter. The recitations a method for treating “inflammatory condition” and “Neurodegenerative conditions”, which are not described in such a way as to satisfy the statutory requirements within the purview of 35 U.S.C. § 112 first paragraph, because the specification does not provide essential description to carry out the invention and thus lacks enablement as well. As stated in the MPEP 2164.01 (a), there are many factors [1) The nature of the invention, 2) The state of the prior art, 3) The level of ordinary skill in the art, 4) The level of predictability in the art, 5) The amount of direction and guidance provided by the inventor, 6) The existence of working examples, 7) The breadth of the claims, and 8) The quantity of experimentation needed to make or use the invention based on the content of the disclosure (In re Wands, 8 USPQ 2d 1400, 1404 (CAFC, 1988)] to be considered when determining whether there is sufficient evidence to support a determination that a disclosure does not satisfy the enablement requirement and whether any necessary experimentation is “undue.” Therefore, it is not likely that a single dose / compound would be predicted to be able to prevent, delay or treat the progression of diverse “inflammatory condition” and “Neurodegenerative conditions” by administering an effective amount of a composition comprising Vitamin A, beta-caryophyllene (BCB), and butyrate or butyric acid in form of tributyrin etc., as claimed in the instant application. Based on the unpredictable nature of the invention and state of the prior art (WO 2019/217907 A1, IDS) and the extreme breadth of the claims, one skilled in the art could not perform the claimed methods of use without undue experimentation, see In re Armbruster 185 USPQ 152 CCPA 1975. Thus, the specification fails to provide sufficient support of the broad use of the method claims 1-8 to treat all kinds of diverse “inflammatory condition” and “Neurodegenerative conditions” by administering an effective amount of a composition comprising Vitamin A, beta-caryophyllene (BCB), and butyrate or butyric acid in form of tributyrin thereof. Therefore, it is suggested to amend the claims within the context and scope of the claims [such as, deleting the word “Neurodegenerative conditions” and limiting with specific type of “inflammatory condition” that actually contemplated in the specification (e.g., incorporating the limitations of claim 8 (except “Neurodegenerative conditions” into claim 1) and that have enough support] in order to overcome the rejection. Objections The title of the invention is too long. The title should be brief but technically accurate and descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed (MPEP 606, 37 CFR 1.72). Telephone Inquiry Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Golam Shameem, Ph.D. whose telephone number is (571) 272-0706. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday from 7:30 AM - 6:00 PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Clinton Brooks, Ph.D. can be reached at (571) 270-7682. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application should be directed to the Group receptionist, whose telephone number is (571) 272-1600. /GOLAM M SHAMEEM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1621
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 03, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 26, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12736519
GROUP-TYPE ANALYSIS OF HYDROCARBON SAMPLES
2y 12m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12735409
BENZOXAZINONE DERIVATIVES AS SELECTIVE CYTOTOXIC AGENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12721798
COSMETIC COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS OF USING SAME
3y 4m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12715850
LOW TOXICITY NMP SUBSTITUTES AND USES THEREOF
4y 0m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Patent 12715869
Modulators of CAMKK2 as Ligand Directed Degraders
2y 5m to grant Granted Aug 25, 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
87%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+16.0%)
1y 10m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 893 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