Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/317,731

Microdosing System, Apparatus, Method

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
May 11, 2021
Examiner
FARRAR, LAUREN PENG
Art Unit
3783
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Wave Neuroscience Inc.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 8m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
593 granted / 753 resolved
+8.8% vs TC avg
Strong +15% interview lift
Without
With
+15.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 8m
Avg Prosecution
60 currently pending
Career history
813
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
51.9%
+11.9% vs TC avg
§102
25.4%
-14.6% vs TC avg
§112
13.7%
-26.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 753 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/10/25 has been entered. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claim(s) 20-33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davidson et al. (WO 2017/118980 A1) in view of Veirtio-Oja (US 2002/0173729 A1). With regard to claim 20 and 30, Davidson discloses A system comprising: an electroencephalogram (EEG) unit (p. 29, lines 10-12 and p. 30, line 22, EEG is a biomarker that is measured and thus an EEG unit must be present to measure this biomarker) operable to measure an EEG marker value of user; a storage container (Fig. 34, element 1603) storing a psychoactive drug including at least one of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)(abstract); a microdose control unit (1607) operable to: receive the EEG marker value from the EEG unit, and determine an initial microdose of the psychoactive drug based on the EEG marker value (p.70, line 1-9, p. 71, line 1-3, p. 33, lines 1-20, 27-31, p. 34, lines 1-5, dosage of drug is based on acquired pharmacodynamic feedback which includes the measurement of the biomarker which can be EEG); and a microdose interface unit (1609) operable with the storage container to dispense the initial microdose to the user (p. 70, lines 10-14). However, Davidson does not disclose the microdose control unit communicatively coupled to the EEG unit for receiving the EEG marker value in real-time. Viertio-Oja teaches having a control unit (Fig. 1, element 16) for use in dispensing a medication (14) to a patient and further teaches an EEG unit (26) that is connected to the patient to measure EEG marker values in real-time (via cable 24 forming a closed loop where the EEG is able to take readings directly from the patient and send the signal information to the control unit that then determines a dose delivery based on the EEG signals (see closed loop of Fig.1)). Because Davidson already teaches that the microdose inhaler that delivers THC can include the controller as well as the decision module (which is similar to the control unit and EEG determination unit of Viertio-Oja) which takes the inputted EEG information from a user to determine dosage instructions, the EEG information could be provided in real-time as taught by Viertio-Oja rather than from previous user input in order to provide the most accurate up-to-date information prior to delivering the medication ([0056] reducing response times). Therefore, it would be prima facie obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Davidson with the real-time monitoring of EEG marker values as taught by Viertio-Oja for the purpose of providing more accurate and up-to-date information prior to delivering medication ([0056], reducing response times). With regard to claim 21 and 31, Davidson discloses wherein the microdose control unit is further operable to determine one or more adjusted microdoses of the psychoactive drug based on a change in the EEG marker value (p. 33, lines 1-20, 27-31, p. 34, lines 1-5). With regard to claim 22, Davidson discloses wherein the microdose control unit is further operable to: compare the change in the EEG marker value to one or more of a target value or a target range (p. 22, lines 25-end, pharmacodynamic parameters of which EEG is one, compares to a predetermined threshold); and determine one or more adjusted microdoses of the psychoactive drug to move an adjusted EEG maker value to one or more of: close to the target value or within the target range (p. 22, lines 25-end, p. 33, lines 1-20, 27-31, p. 34, lines 1-5 the automatic adjustment will alter the delivery in order to stay within the threshold). With regard to claim 23, Davidson discloses wherein the microdose control unit is further operable to: determine the initial microdose of the psychoactive drug by determining one or more of: the psychoactive drug, a number of doses, a dosage strength, a dosage duration, a dosage interval, or combinations thereof (p. 33, lines 1-20, 27-31, p. 34, lines 1-5). With regard to claim 24, Davidson discloses wherein the microdose interface unit is further operable to: dispense the psychoactive drug to the user without receiving input from a user interface (p. 33, lines 1-20, 27-31, p. 34, lines 1-5, the controller is used automatically and does not require additional user input). With regard to claim 26, Davidson discloses further comprising an interface (1605) operable to provide an indication to administer the psychoactive drug to the user. With regard to claim 27, Davidson discloses further comprising a user interface (1605) operable to receive dosage information for the user. With regard to claim 28 and 33, Davidson discloses wherein the storage container (1603) is separate from the microdose interface unit (1609), and wherein the storage container is coupled to the microdose interface unit to facilitate dispensing the psychoactive drug to the user (p .70, line 1-9, p. 71, line 1-3, p. 33, lines 1-20, 27-31, p. 34, lines 1-5). With regard to claim 25 and 32, Davidson discloses the claimed invention except for an electronic type interface unit. Viertio-Oja teaches a similar dosing device that has a microdose interface unit that comprises an electronically controlled pump (14a) and an electronic nebulizer (14b). Therefore, it would be prima facie obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the interface of Davidson as taught by Viertio-Oja for the purpose of delivering medication in a controlled coordinated fashion ([0060]). With regard to claim 29, Davidson discloses the claimed invention except for the specific EEG marker value. Viertio-Oja teaches wherein the EEG marker value comprises one or more of: an intrinsic frequency of a predefined EEG band ([0048]), EEG readings are determined with a specific frequency range or band). Therefore, it would be prima facie obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Davidson with the specific EEG marker value as taught by Viertio-Oja for the purpose of delivering medication in a controlled coordinated fashion ([0060]). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 20-33 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Viertio-Oja was previously used in earlier Office Actions as the primary reference however it was argued that Viertio-Oja did not teach micro dosing and did not teach the delivery of a psychoactive drug from the claimed list of drugs. Thus, Davidson was used in the last Final Office Action as the primary reference for teaching microdosing of THC and using EEG information in its determination of dosing parameters. However, with the new amendments to now include real-time measurements from the EEG unit, Viertio-Oja is being brought back to teach these limitations. Viertio-Oja teaches similar components such as the control unit and delivery unit which use the EEG measurement readings to create dosing parameters to the patient. Because the inhaler of Davidson teaches that the controller as well as a decision making unit, which takes information EEG in order to determine dosing parameters, can all be a part of the inhaler in one device, it would be prima facie obvious to provide real-time EEG measurements (Viertio-Oja) rather than the inputted measurements used in Davidson. Thus Viertio-Oja is simply used to teach taking real time EEG measurements and inputting this information to a drug delivery unit for determination of dosing parameters. The other limitations such as microdosing and the delivery of a psychoactive drug are still taught by the primary reference of Davidson. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAUREN P FARRAR whose telephone number is (571)270-1496. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am - 5pm. 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, Kevin Sirmons can be reached at 571-272-4965. 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. /Lauren P Farrar/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 11, 2021
Application Filed
Jul 25, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 29, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Feb 28, 2025
Response Filed
Jun 06, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Dec 10, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 21, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 23, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594410
DEVICE FOR DELIVERING AN ANTIMICROBIAL COMPOSITION INTO A MEDICAL DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12575966
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ULTRASOUND-ENHANCED DELIVERY OF DRUGS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12569662
MEDICAL CONNECTOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12564681
PEN-LIKE SYRINGE SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12558484
Autoinjector
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
79%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+15.1%)
3y 8m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 753 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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