Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/777,124

BICYCLIC HETEROCYCLES AS FGFR INHIBITORS

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Jul 18, 2024
Priority
Oct 14, 2019 — provisional 62/914,766 +3 more
Examiner
SHTERENGARTS, SAMANTHA L
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
INCYTE Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1m
Est. Remaining
87%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allowance Rate
1337 granted / 1685 resolved
+19.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
67 currently pending
Career history
1722
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.4%
-38.6% vs TC avg
§103
18.5%
-21.5% vs TC avg
§102
24.0%
-16.0% vs TC avg
§112
22.3%
-17.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1685 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Priority 2 PNG media_image1.png 135 598 media_image1.png Greyscale Information Disclosure Statement 3. The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on July 10, 2025 and April 29, 2026 were in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and 37 CFR 1.98. The IDS documents were considered. A signed copy of each form 1449 is enclosed herewith. Status of Claims 4. Claims 60-63 are pending and under consideration. Double Patenting 5. 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 §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) 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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The 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/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp. 6. Claims 60-63 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-29 of U.S. Patent no. 12/083,124. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-29 of U.S. Patent no. 12/083,124 anticipate the instant claims. For example, the compound of instant claim 60 is anticipated by the last compound in col. 326 in claim 29 of U.S. Patent no. 12/083,124. 7. Claims 60-63 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-52 of U.S. Patent no. 11/607,416. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-52 of U.S. Patent no. 11/607,416 anticipate the instant claims. For example, the compound of instant claim 60 is anticipated by the third-to-last compound in col. 325 in claim 50 of U.S. Patent no. 11/607,416. Conclusion 8. No claims allowed. 9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Samantha Shterengarts whose telephone number is (571)270-5316. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday thru Thursday 9-6pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Mr. Adam Milligan can be reached on 571-270-7674. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. 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://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /SAMANTHA L SHTERENGARTS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1623
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 18, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 17, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12679837
AMINOPYRIMIDINE COMPOUND AS CDK2/4/6 TRIPLE INHIBITOR
4y 3m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12679852
METHOD FOR PREPARING AN ENANTIOMERICALLY ENRICHED FORM OF 3-(2-CHLOROTHIAZOL-5-YL)-8-METHYL-7-OXO-6-PHENYL-2,3-DIHYDROTHIAZOLO[3,2-A]PYRIMIDIN-4-IUM-5-OLATE
2y 12m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12673917
NEW BISPHENOLS BEARING PENDANT CLICKABLE NORBORNENYL GROUP AND POLYMERS THEREFROM
3y 0m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12673050
Compositions and their Use for the Treatment of A1-Antitrypsin Deficiency
2y 6m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12673939
METHODS OF SYNTHESIS OF HETEROARYL DERIVATIVES OF TRIAZOLYL ACRYLAMIDES AND CRYSTALLINE FORMS
2y 7m to grant Granted Jul 07, 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
79%
Grant Probability
87%
With Interview (+8.0%)
2y 1m (~1m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1685 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