Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026
Application No. 18/823,147

TEBIPENEM PIVOXIL CRYSTALLINE FORMS, COMPOSITIONS INCLUDING THE SAME, METHODS OF MANUFACTURE, AND METHODS OF USE

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Sep 03, 2024
Priority
Feb 06, 2017 — provisional 62/455,109 +4 more
Examiner
YOO, SUN JAE
Art Unit
1621
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Spero Therapeutics Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
71%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
7m
Est. Remaining
71%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 71% — above average
71%
Career Allowance Rate
879 granted / 1237 resolved
+11.1% vs TC avg
Minimal +0% lift
Without
With
+0.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
97 currently pending
Career history
1309
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.1%
-38.9% vs TC avg
§103
17.2%
-22.8% vs TC avg
§102
27.7%
-12.3% vs TC avg
§112
33.8%
-6.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1237 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 V in the reply filed on July 2, 2026 is acknowledged. 3. Claims 1-8, 13-20 and 53-56 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected subject matter.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 July 2, 2026. 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. 4. Claims 41-52 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 41-55 of U.S. Appl. 19,554,577. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other for the reasons provided below. The claims are directed to hydrobromide tebipenem pivoxil form B that comprise peaks at the 2 theta values of as claimed. The specification further defines hydrobromide tebipenem pivoxil form B as containing peaks as listed in Table 14. The crystalline form anticipates the present claims. 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 03, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 08, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Jun 08, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Sep 14, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DP
Sep 29, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Sep 29, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12746246
COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR TREATING AGE-RELATED MACULAR DEGENERATION
5y 0m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12735424
FUSED PYRAZINE DERIVATIVES AS A2A / A2B INHIBITORS
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12692253
Antimicrobial Compounds and Methods
5y 0m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12690381
ORGANOMETALLIC COMPOUND AND APPLICATION THEREOF
2y 8m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12674026
PROCESS FOR PREPARING POLYOL-BASED ESTERS OF ACYL-CAPPED HYDROXY CARBOXYLIC ACIDS
4y 6m 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
71%
Grant Probability
71%
With Interview (+0.3%)
2y 8m (~7m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1237 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