Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 17/255,302

METHOD AND DEVICE FOR VALIDATING A BLOOD PRESSURE MEASUREMENT SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Dec 22, 2020
Examiner
TRAN, THO Q
Art Unit
3791
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Cnsystems Medizintechnik GMBH
OA Round
4 (Non-Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
4-5
OA Rounds
4y 3m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
343 granted / 556 resolved
-8.3% vs TC avg
Strong +37% interview lift
Without
With
+37.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 3m
Avg Prosecution
38 currently pending
Career history
594
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
13.3%
-26.7% vs TC avg
§103
39.2%
-0.8% vs TC avg
§102
14.7%
-25.3% vs TC avg
§112
29.9%
-10.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 556 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION Non-Final Rejection 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 . Claims Status Claims 1-15, 17, and 28 are cancelled. Claim 16 is amended. Claims 16, 18-27, and 29-31 remain pending. Response to Arguments The objection to claim 16 in section 2.a of the previous Office Action is withdrawn in view of the amendments to claim 16. The objection in section 2.b is withdrawn from claim 16 but maintained for claims 18-25. The claims should be amended to positively recite a method step (use of gerund form). The 35 U.S.C. § 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. § 112, 1st paragraph rejection of claims 16 and 18-25 are withdrawn in view of the clarifying arguments on page 1 of the response. The 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. § 112, 2nd paragraph rejection of claims 16 and 18-25 are withdrawn in view of the response on the first page and amendments to claim 16. Claim Objections Claims 18-25 are objected to because of the following informalities: the Office recommends removing “wherein” and amending the claims to state the method further comprises <cite a step>. For example, claim 18 can be amended to the cite the method according to claim 16 wherein the comparing step comprises (i) comparing the simulated, continuous blood pressure curve with the blood pressure curve … and (ii) determining differences between the stored and the simulated blood pressure curve, and (iii) validating the blood pressure measuring system by using the differences as a criterion. Similar changes can be made for claims 19-25 where applicable. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: Change “suitable” in line 3 to “configured.” Insert “arterial” before “blood” in line 11. Insert “arterial” before the first instance of “blood” in line 19. Additionally, and in light of the comments and amendments by Applicant in response to the previous Office Action, the Office recommends amending claim 1 to improve clarity. The first step (routine blood pressure measurement operation) appears directed toward gathering the data that can be used in the validation/test phase. In the validation test phase, a previously recorded blood pressure curve and the contact pressure pc(t) of the blood pressure measuring system are fed as input into a simulation module. Because claim 16 refers back to the contact pressure, it would be more clear to amend line 9 to read “determining and recording an arterial blood pressure curve” to clarify what is being used in the start of the validation/test phase is a previously recorded arterial blood pressure curve and it’s corresponding contact pressure (as currently amended, the claim appears to use the contact pressure previously cited but does not make it clear that the previously recorded blood pressure curve is the one that corresponds to contact pressure. The Office also recommends amending the final wherein clause to positively recite a method step of determining whether the validation is positive or negative as the method does not appear to require determining a validation result (only a comparing result). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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 16 and 18-25 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. In claim 16, line 13, there appears to be a word missing from the end (system?). It is unclear what is meant here. In claim 16, the preamble recites a method of validating a blood pressure measuring system. However, the final step does not necessarily require any validation assessment to be performed using the comparison data. This could be overcome with the recommended amendment cited in the claim 16 objection above. In claim 19, it is noted that the previously recorded blood pressure curve may be obtained from an intra-arterial blood pressure measurement or NIBP measurement. However, the Office understands that in claim 16, the contact pressure pc(t) input signal needs to correspond to the arterial blood pressure source. Claim 16 can be interpreted as referencing the pc(t) signal that was generated during the operation of the CNAP device used during the routine BP measurement (which would be different from data sourced from one of the two sources cited in claim 19 that was recorded at some other time). One option to resolve the issue would be to combine claim 20 with claim 19 and citing the limitations of claim 20 first. Conclusion Claims 16 and 18-25 are rejected. Claims 26, 27 and 29-31 are allowed. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tho Q. Tran whose telephone number is (571)270-1892. The examiner can normally be reached 7-5. 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. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jacqueline Cheng can be reached at 5712725596. 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. /THO Q TRAN/ Examiner, Art Unit 3791 /JACQUELINE CHENG/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 22, 2020
Application Filed
Jun 15, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Oct 21, 2024
Response Filed
Feb 12, 2025
Final Rejection — §112
May 07, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
May 08, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 11, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Sep 17, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 27, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Mar 24, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12575762
Wearable Sensor and Sweating Analysis Device
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12575767
OPTICAL MEASUREMENT DEVICE AND PROBE HOLDER SET
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12575784
DEVICES AND METHODS FOR THE DETECTION OF INTRAORAL ACID EXPOSURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12575814
Fluid Sample Collection System
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12551639
RESPIRATORY FLOW SENSOR
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

4-5
Expected OA Rounds
62%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+37.4%)
4y 3m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 556 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