Member Info for KonarA

@DA - sorry i couldn't reply earlier as i was driving.

From what i can see Australia process is different to Europe. Here they grant it when the examiner has no objections and then give the public a 12 month window to object.

I think in Australia they Accept the application when the examiner has no further objections to the application, but only Grant after a period in which the public can object.

Check the date on latest filings

Try that link again:

http://pericles.ipaustralia.gov.au/ols/auspat/applicationDetails.do?applicationNo=2013301341

http://pericles.ipaustralia.gov.au/ols/auspat/applicationDetails.do;jsessionid=CvaAlnq-nKHsd-4SZLmrvNKQRsOsyJ5Ju1SE7GS8M5hmLAbVI35x!131429764

It seems that the patent has been accepted.

Lol - didnt have the cash in his SIPP to cover an admin charge.. so they sold some of his shares.

http://pericles.ipaustralia.gov.au/ols/auspat/applicationDetails.do?applicationNo=2013301341

Latest examiners report published. Seems a minor technicality in claim 20 (!!) Is the only thing left to overcome.

Should be approved soon.

Applications for different countries. The prefix tells you which country it is.

The AIM market is never going to value this at my target exit price without significant licencing. My preference would be a wholesale buyout of course!

Just to be clear, the discussion was in April, but the amendments were only submitted on the 6th of June.

The US Patent is the big prize imo.. and we could be close to approval. With the European patent we know that the company had a conversation with the examiner prior to re-submitting the amended application . The application was them approved days later. Since the last submission/rejection of the US Patent application, the European patent has been approved, so we should know the required ammendments to get the application approved. Furthermore, we know from the submitted documentation to the USPTO that a discussion was had with the Examiner on April 23rd 2018. We can also see from the amendments that changes have been made as a result of this discussion. When amendments have been submitted previously, its been a 5 week turnaround with the examiner to get a response. Whats the betting that we may get a more favourable response sooner?

If you search the PDF for the application number is this format: 2 883 054 Then you will find the relevant sections.

Try this: http://archive.epo.org/epo/pubs/bulletin/2018/bulletin1824.pdf if not: https://register.epo.org/application?number=EP13750368&lng=en&tab=event Click that link, then on the line dated 11/5/18 there is a hyperlink to the bulletin. Scancell Moditope is published and in full effect.

The publication of the European Patent Bulletin is at 13.00 CET. Not sure if that means it is not formally granted until then.. in case anyone is looking for an RNS at 7am.

They may not have published the data but they certainly presented it. At the time they said "this additional information potentially enables the identification of patients prior to commencement of therapy who are most likely to respond to treatment in future clinical trials with SCIB1". I don't claim to be anything other than a layman in terms of clinical research, but i would have thought: 1. Using a diagnostic with a sound scientific (if still unproven) basis, is still better than random pot luck and, 2. I wouldn't have though using a diagnostic as a selection criteria for the trial would tie us to its future use. What do you think?

apologies - my misunderstanding. I was thinking you were referring to the lead researcher. you are right that no CRO has been announced. Would be surprised though considering Sally Adams was given a directorship 4 years ago to oversee the trial design. I am surprised you said you wouldn't want OncImmune involvement. Could you explain? Given that their tech has proven to be able to predict the people that would respond to SCIB1, then this could be invaluable for patient selection when trying to demonstrate improved response over CI alone.

Scancell haven't run any trials in the US before now.

You are right that it doesn't necessarily mean any mystery 3rd parties. But the CRO was known in December 2015 and Eurogentec were appointed in July 2016. Yet at the beginning of 2017 we were told that the IND application was on track to be submitted in H1 2017. So unlikely to be either of those pushing it out to mid 18. If i was hazarding a guess I would say its one of two things (or even both). Oncimmune tech being used to screen patients onto the trial (probably the most likely) Or the IND application (which have to name any sponsor/collaborator) includes a CI partner *cough Merck cough*

we knew all the clinics involved back in December 2015. They were all "On course" to submit the IND in early 2017.

A few weeks ago i posted a response from John Chiplin to my question (which was basically "why are we still waiting for the IND submission") As always, i feel you have to read between the lines to get to the pertinent info. In his response he said (and I paraphrase) the IND application is dependent on submissions from many third parties, of which Ichor is just one. In early 2017 we knew all the investigators, we knew Scancell's involvement and we knew Ichor's involvement. We were also told that the IND was on track to be submitted in 2017. So the question is.... what unknown third party is now pushing out the IND submission?

IMO - the moditope patent that may well trigger greater interest would be the US Patent. So it was reassuring to see there were major updates and supporting evidence submitted to the US Moditope Patent application yesterday, alongside a request for re-review. Given that we now have a successful application in Europe, I should imagine it will be easier to amend foreign applications to bring them in synch and get them approved.