Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 16/645,848

CONNECTORS FOR PATIENT INTERFACE MODULE AND ULTRASOUND IMAGING DEVICE

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Mar 10, 2020
Examiner
TALTY, MARIA CHRISTINA
Art Unit
3797
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Koninklijke Philips N.V.
OA Round
8 (Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
9-10
OA Rounds
3y 7m
To Grant
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
75 granted / 121 resolved
-8.0% vs TC avg
Strong +33% interview lift
Without
With
+32.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
165
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.2%
-35.8% vs TC avg
§103
46.5%
+6.5% vs TC avg
§102
17.3%
-22.7% vs TC avg
§112
27.7%
-12.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 121 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION 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 . Response to Arguments Applicant’s argument regarding the rejection of Claim 13 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tegg has been fully considered and is withdrawn in view of the amendments. Regarding the rejection of all remaining corresponding claims, applicant’s argument submitted on Pages 11-13 relies on the supposed deficiencies with respect to the rejection of parent Claim 13. Applicant’s argument is withdrawn for the same reasons detailed above. The rejections of Claims 19 and 22 are withdrawn in view of the cancelation of the claims. 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. Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 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 or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The limitation “a width, a height, and a shape of the proximal connector of the ICE catheter corresponds to a width, a length, a height, and a shape of the distal connector of the elongate cable” fails to comply with the written description requirement. The disclosure merely teaches that the electrical cable extends through the core of the body of the catheter ([0002]). The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 17 and 27-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The term “about” in Claims 17 and 27 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “about” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For purposes of applying prior art, the limitation “about” is interpreted as within the ranges as disclosed in [0090]-[0093]. Claims not explicitly addressed above are rejected as depending from a rejected claim and failing to cure deficiencies of the parent claim. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 13-14, 18, 20-21, 23-25, and 29-30 are allowed. The rejection of Claims 12-14, 18, 20-21, 23-25, and 29-30 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tegg is withdrawn in view of the amendments. The rejection of Claims 19 and 22 are withdrawn in view of the cancelation of the claims. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Tegg is cited for teaching an ultrasound imaging system, comprising: an intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) catheter configured to be advanced through a blood vessel to a heart of a patient ([0025]), and comprising: an ultrasound transducer array disposed at the distal portion of the ICE catheter ([0026]) and configured to obtain imaging data ([0005] and [0031]), wherein the ultrasound transducer array comprises a plurality of acoustic elements ([0027]), circuitry disposed at the distal portion of the ICE catheter ([0026]), a plurality of conductive wires extending between the distal portion and a proximal portion of the ICE catheter ([0005] and [0029]), a proximal connector disposed at the proximal portion of the ICE catheter ([0025]). The prior art does not disclose or reasonably suggest an elongate cable configured to: extend between the ICE catheter and a console; and carry the imaging data from the ICE catheter to the console, wherein the elongate cable, the ICE catheter, and the console are physically distinct from one another, wherein the elongate cable comprises: a proximal connector disposed at a proximal portion of the elongate cable; and a distal connector disposed at a distal portion of the elongate cable, wherein the distal connector of the elongate cable and the proximal connector of the ICE catheter are configured to be removably coupled to one another, wherein the proximal connector of the elongate cable is configured to be removably coupled to the console and comprises a plurality of electrical isolation transformers associated with the plurality of data channels, wherein the circuitry is configured to perform beamforming of the imaging data at the distal portion of the ICE catheter such that: a quantity of the plurality of data channels is less than a quantity of the plurality of acoustic elements; and the plurality of electrical isolation transformers fits inside of the proximal connector of the elongate cable. Claims 17 and 26-28 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARIA CHRISTINA TALTY whose telephone number is (571)272-8022. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8:30-5:30 EST. 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, Mike Carey can be reached at (571) 270-7235. 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. /MARIA CHRISTINA TALTY/ Examiner, Art Unit 3797 /MICHAEL J CAREY/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3795
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 10, 2020
Application Filed
Jan 26, 2022
Non-Final Rejection — §112
May 02, 2022
Response Filed
Jun 28, 2022
Final Rejection — §112
Sep 06, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 08, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 27, 2022
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 05, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 02, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §112
May 12, 2023
Response Filed
Jun 08, 2023
Final Rejection — §112
Aug 04, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 16, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 20, 2023
Request for Continued Examination
Sep 27, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 01, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §112
May 15, 2024
Response Filed
Jul 24, 2024
Final Rejection — §112
Oct 01, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 16, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 16, 2024
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Oct 31, 2024
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Oct 31, 2024
Examiner Interview Summary
Nov 01, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Nov 04, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 02, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Jul 09, 2025
Response Filed
Aug 26, 2025
Final Rejection — §112
Mar 27, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12588889
ULTRASONIC ENDOSCOPE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582374
PERSONALIZED MOTION-GATED CORONARY CTA SCANNING SYSTEMS AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12569300
SYSTEMS AND METHODS RELATED TO ELONGATE DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12569125
MEDICAL IMAGING SYSTEM, MEDICAL IMAGING PROCESSING METHOD, AND MEDICAL INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12551185
On-Screen Markers For Out-Of-Plane Needle Guidance
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

9-10
Expected OA Rounds
62%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+32.9%)
3y 7m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 121 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month